The difference between the PbPb and pp measurements from Table 3.

The distribution of jet-correlated charged-particle tracks as a function of $\Delta\mathrm{r}$ in pp and PbPb collisions. The PbPb results are shown for different centrality regions.

The difference between the PbPb and pp measurements from Table 5.

The distribution of jet-correlated charged-particle tracks with $\Delta\mathrm{r} <1$ as a function of ${p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{trk}}}$ in PbPb and pp collisions. The PbPb results are shown for different centrality regions.

The corresponding results for the difference between the PbPb and pp measurements from Table 7.

The radial jet momentum distribution $\mathrm{P}(\Delta\mathrm{r})$ of jets in pp and PbPb collisions. The PbPb results are shown for different centrality regions.

The ratio between PbPb and pp measurements from Table 9 for the indicated intervals of ${p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{trk}}}$.

The jet shape $\rho(\Delta\mathrm{r})$ in pp and PbPb collisions. The PbPb results are shown for different centrality regions.

The ratio between the PbPb and pp measurements from Table 11 for the inclusive range $0.7< {p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{trk}}} <300GeV$.

The invariant mass spectra of dimuon events. The points with error bars represent the observed yield. The histogram represents the expectations from the SM processes. The bins have equal width in logarithmic scale so that the width in GeV becomes larger with increasing mass.

The cumulative distributions, where all events above the specified mass on the x axis are summed, of the invariant mass spectra of dielectron events. The points with error bars represent the observed yield. The histogram represents the expectations from SM processes.

The cumulative distributions, where all events above the specified mass on the x axis are summed, of the invariant mass spectra of dimuon events. The points with error bars represent the observed yield. The histogram represents the expectations from SM processes.

The observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of production cross section and branching fraction for a spin-1 resonance with a width equal to 0.6% of the resonance mass, relative to the product of production cross section and branching fraction of a Z boson.

The expected upper limits together with the 68 and 95% quantiles at 95% CL on the product of production cross section and branching fraction for a spin-1 resonance with a width equal to 0.6% of the resonance mass, relative to the product of production cross section and branching fraction of a Z boson.

The observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of production cross section and branching fraction for a spin-2 resonance with a width equal to 0.6% of the resonance mass, relative to the product of production cross section and branching fraction of a Z boson.

The expected upper limits together with the 68 and 95% quantiles at 95% CL on the product of production cross section and branching fraction for a spin-2 resonance with a width equal to 0.6% of the resonance mass, relative to the product of production cross section and branching fraction of a Z boson.

The observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of production cross section and branching fraction for a spin-1 resonance, for widths equal to 0.6, 3, 5, and 10% of the resonance mass, relative to the product of production cross section and branching fraction for a Z boson.

The expected upper limits at 95% CL on the product of production cross section and branching fraction for a spin-1 resonance, for widths equal to 0.6, 3, 5, and 10% of the resonance mass, relative to the product of production cross section and branching fraction for a Z boson.

Limits in the ( $c_{d}$ , $c_{u}$ ) plane obtained by recasting the combined limit at 95% CL on the $Z'$ boson cross section from dielectron and dimuon channels. The closed contour representing the GSM model class is composed of thick line segments. Each point on a segment corresponds to a particular model, and the location of the point gives the mass limit on the relevant $Z'$ boson. As indicated in the bottom left legend, the segment line styles correspond to ranges of the particular mixing angle for each considered model. The bottom right legend indicates the constituents of each model class.

Limits in the ( $c_{d}$ , $c_{u}$ ) plane obtained by recasting the combined limit at 95% CL on the $Z'$ boson cross section from dielectron and dimuon channels. The closed contour representing the LR model class is composed of thick line segments. Each point on a segment corresponds to a particular model, and the location of the point gives the mass limit on the relevant $Z'$ boson. As indicated in the bottom left legend, the segment line styles correspond to ranges of the particular mixing angle for each considered model. The bottom right legend indicates the constituents of each model class.

Limits in the ( $c_{d}$ , $c_{u}$ ) plane obtained by recasting the combined limit at 95% CL on the $Z'$ boson cross section from dielectron and dimuon channels. The closed contour representing the E6 model class is composed of thick line segments. Each point on a segment corresponds to a particular model, and the location of the point gives the mass limit on the relevant $Z'$ boson. As indicated in the bottom left legend, the segment line styles correspond to ranges of the particular mixing angle for each considered model. The bottom right legend indicates the constituents of each model class.

The observed local p-value for the dielectron channel as a function of the dilepton invariant mass.

The observed local p-value for the dimuon channel as a function of the dilepton invariant mass.

The observed local p-value for the combined channel as a function of the dilepton invariant mass.

Limits at 95% confidence level for the masses of the DM particle, which is assumed to be Dirac fermion, and its associated mediator, in a simplified model of DM production via a vector mediator. The parameter exclusion is obtained by comparing the limits on product of the production cross section and the branching fraction for decay to a Z boson, with the values obtained from calculations in the simplified model. For each combination of the DM particle and mediator mass values, the width of the mediator is taken into account in the limit calculation. The lines with the hatching represents the excluded regions. The solid grey lines, marked as “Ωh 2 ≥ 0.12”, correspond to parameter regions that reproduce the observed DM relic density in the universe, with the hatched area indicating the region where the DM relic abundance exceeds the observed value.

Limits at 95% confidence level for the masses of the DM particle, which is assumed to be Dirac fermion, and its associated mediator, in a simplified model of DM production via a vector mediator. The parameter exclusion is obtained by comparing the limits on product of the production cross section and the branching fraction for decay to a Z boson, with the values obtained from calculations in the simplified model. For each combination of the DM particle and mediator mass values, the width of the mediator is taken into account in the limit calculation. The lines with the hatching represents the excluded regions. The solid grey lines, marked as “Ωh 2 ≥ 0.12”, correspond to parameter regions that reproduce the observed DM relic density in the universe, with the hatched area indicating the region where the DM relic abundance exceeds the observed value.

Limits at 95% confidence level for the masses of the DM particle, which is assumed to be Dirac fermion, and its associated mediator, in a simplified model of DM production via a vector mediator. The parameter exclusion is obtained by comparing the limits on product of the production cross section and the branching fraction for decay to a Z boson, with the values obtained from calculations in the simplified model. For each combination of the DM particle and mediator mass values, the width of the mediator is taken into account in the limit calculation. The lines with the hatching represents the excluded regions. The solid grey lines, marked as “Ωh 2 ≥ 0.12”, correspond to parameter regions that reproduce the observed DM relic density in the universe, with the hatched area indicating the region where the DM relic abundance exceeds the observed value.

Limits at 95% confidence level for the masses of the DM particle, which is assumed to be Dirac fermion, and its associated mediator, in a simplified model of DM production via a axial vector. The parameter exclusion is obtained by comparing the limits on product of the production cross section and the branching fraction for decay to a Z boson, with the values obtained from calculations in the simplified model. For each combination of the DM particle and mediator mass values, the width of the mediator is taken into account in the limit calculation. The lines with the hatching represents the excluded regions. The solid grey lines, marked as “Ωh 2 ≥ 0.12”, correspond to parameter regions that reproduce the observed DM relic density in the universe, with the hatched area indicating the region where the DM relic abundance exceeds the observed value.

Limits at 95% confidence level for the masses of the DM particle, which is assumed to be Dirac fermion, and its associated mediator, in a simplified model of DM production via a axial vector. The parameter exclusion is obtained by comparing the limits on product of the production cross section and the branching fraction for decay to a Z boson, with the values obtained from calculations in the simplified model. For each combination of the DM particle and mediator mass values, the width of the mediator is taken into account in the limit calculation. The lines with the hatching represents the excluded regions. The solid grey lines, marked as “Ωh 2 ≥ 0.12”, correspond to parameter regions that reproduce the observed DM relic density in the universe, with the hatched area indicating the region where the DM relic abundance exceeds the observed value.

Scan of the likelihood function for the search in the $\tau\tau$ final state for a single narrow resonance, $\phi$, produced via gluon fusion ($gg\phi$) or in association with b quarks ($bb\phi$). The scan is performed in 40000 points of the ($\sigma(gg\phi)\cdot B(\phi\rightarrow\tau\tau)$, $\sigma(bb\phi)\cdot B(\phi\rightarrow\tau\tau)$) plane. An asimov dataset constructed from the expectation of all backgrounds is tested against a background hypothesis without the SM Higgs boson. For further details and instructions, please have a look into the following README file http://cms-results.web.cern.ch/cms-results/public-results/publications/HIG-17-020/2D-likelihood-scans/README.txt. Selected examples of such a likelihood scan are given in Figure 8 of the paper.

Scan of the likelihood function for the search in the $\tau\tau$ final state for a single narrow resonance, $\phi$, produced via gluon fusion ($gg\phi$) or in association with b quarks ($bb\phi$). The scan is performed in 40000 points of the ($\sigma(gg\phi)\cdot B(\phi\rightarrow\tau\tau)$, $\sigma(bb\phi)\cdot B(\phi\rightarrow\tau\tau)$) plane. The observation in data is tested against a background hypothesis including the SM Higgs boson. For further details and instructions, please have a look into the following README file http://cms-results.web.cern.ch/cms-results/public-results/publications/HIG-17-020/2D-likelihood-scans/README.txt. Selected examples of such a likelihood scan are given in Figure 8 of the paper.

Scan of the likelihood function for the search in the $\tau\tau$ final state for a single narrow resonance, $\phi$, produced via gluon fusion ($gg\phi$) or in association with b quarks ($bb\phi$). The scan is performed in 40000 points of the ($\sigma(gg\phi)\cdot B(\phi\rightarrow\tau\tau)$, $\sigma(bb\phi)\cdot B(\phi\rightarrow\tau\tau)$) plane. The observation in data is tested against a background hypothesis without the SM Higgs boson. For further details and instructions, please have a look into the following README file http://cms-results.web.cern.ch/cms-results/public-results/publications/HIG-17-020/2D-likelihood-scans/README.txt. Selected examples of such a likelihood scan are given in Figure 8 of the paper.

Normalized dijet angular distribution for events with 4.2 < dijet mass < 4.8 TeV.

Normalized dijet angular distribution for events with 3.6 < dijet mass < 4.2 TeV.

Normalized dijet angular distribution for events with 3.0 < dijet mass < 3.6 TeV.

Normalized dijet angular distribution for events with 2.4 < dijet mass < 3.0 TeV.

The 95% CL upper limits on the quark coupling gq, as a function of mass, for an axialvector or vector DM mediator with gDM = 1.0 and mDM = 1 GeV.

Electroweak correction factors for events with dijet mass > 6.0 TeV computed by the authors of JHEP 11 (2012) 095 (arXiv:1210.0438).

Electroweak correction factors for events with 5.4 < dijet mass < 6.0 TeV computed by the authors of JHEP 11 (2012) 095 (arXiv:1210.0438).

Electroweak correction factors for events with 4.8 < dijet mass < 5.4 TeV computed by the authors of JHEP 11 (2012) 095 (arXiv:1210.0438).

Electroweak correction factors for events with 4.2 < dijet mass < 4.8 TeV computed by the authors of JHEP 11 (2012) 095 (arXiv:1210.0438).

Electroweak correction factors for events with 3.6 < dijet mass < 4.2 TeV computed by the authors of JHEP 11 (2012) 095 (arXiv:1210.0438).

Electroweak correction factors for events with 3.0 < dijet mass < 3.6 TeV computed by the authors of JHEP 11 (2012) 095 (arXiv:1210.0438).

Electroweak correction factors for events with 2.4 < dijet mass < 3.0 TeV computed by the authors of JHEP 11 (2012) 095 (arXiv:1210.0438).

Covariance matrix for 1 < CHI < 2.

Covariance matrix for 2 < CHI < 3.

Covariance matrix for 3 < CHI < 4.

Covariance matrix for 4 < CHI < 5.

Covariance matrix for 5 < CHI < 6.

Covariance matrix for 6 < CHI < 7.

Covariance matrix for 7 < CHI < 8.

Covariance matrix for 8 < CHI < 9.

Covariance matrix for 9 < CHI < 10.

Covariance matrix for 10 < CHI < 12.

Covariance matrix for 12 < CHI < 14.

Covariance matrix for 14 < CHI < 16.

NLO QCD+EW prediction and benchmark signal predictions for dijet mass > 6.0 TeV.

NLO QCD+EW prediction and benchmark signal predictions for 5.4 < dijet mass < 6.0 TeV.

NLO QCD+EW prediction and benchmark signal predictions for 4.8 < dijet mass < 5.4 TeV.

NLO QCD+EW prediction and benchmark signal predictions for 4.2 < dijet mass < 4.8 TeV.

NLO QCD+EW prediction and benchmark signal predictions for 3.6 < dijet mass < 4.2 TeV.

NLO QCD+EW prediction and benchmark signal predictions for 3.0 < dijet mass < 3.6 TeV.

NLO QCD+EW prediction and benchmark signal predictions for 2.4 < dijet mass < 3.0 TeV.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{l})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{l})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{l})|$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{l})|$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(b_\text{l})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(b_\text{h})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(j_\text{W1})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(j_\text{W2})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(j_\text{1})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(j_\text{2})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(j_\text{3})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(j_\text{4})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Jet type vs. $p_\text{T}(\mathrm{jet})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|\eta(b_\text{l})|$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|\eta(b_\text{h})|$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|\eta(j_\text{W1})|$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|\eta(j_\text{W2})|$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|\eta(j_\text{1})|$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|\eta(j_\text{2})|$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|\eta(j_\text{3})|$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $|\eta(j_\text{4})|$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Jet type vs. $|\eta(\text{jet})|$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}(b_\text{l})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}(b_\text{h})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}(j_\text{W1})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}(j_\text{W2})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}(j_\text{1})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}(j_\text{2})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}(j_\text{3})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}(j_\text{4})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Jet type vs. $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_\text{t}(b_\text{l})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_\text{t}(b_\text{h})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_\text{t}(j_\text{W1})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_\text{t}(j_\text{W2})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_\text{t}(j_\text{1})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_\text{t}(j_\text{2})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_\text{t}(j_\text{3})$.

Absolute cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_\text{t}(j_\text{4})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at particle level as a function of Jet type vs. $\Delta R_\text{t}$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{l})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{l})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{l})|$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{l})|$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Additional jets vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(b_\text{l})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(b_\text{h})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(j_\text{W1})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(j_\text{W2})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(j_\text{1})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(j_\text{2})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(j_\text{3})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $p_\text{T}(j_\text{4})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Jet type vs. $p_\text{T}(\mathrm{jet})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|\eta(b_\text{l})|$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|\eta(b_\text{h})|$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|\eta(j_\text{W1})|$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|\eta(j_\text{W2})|$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|\eta(j_\text{1})|$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|\eta(j_\text{2})|$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|\eta(j_\text{3})|$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $|\eta(j_\text{4})|$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Jet type vs. $|\eta(\text{jet})|$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}(b_\text{l})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}(b_\text{h})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}(j_\text{W1})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}(j_\text{W2})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}(j_\text{1})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}(j_\text{2})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}(j_\text{3})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}(j_\text{4})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Jet type vs. $\Delta R_{\text{j}_\text{t}}$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_\text{t}(b_\text{l})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_\text{t}(b_\text{h})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_\text{t}(j_\text{W1})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_\text{t}(j_\text{W2})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_\text{t}(j_\text{1})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_\text{t}(j_\text{2})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_\text{t}(j_\text{3})$.

Normalized cross section at particle level as a function of $\Delta R_\text{t}(j_\text{4})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at particle level as a function of Jet type vs. $\Delta R_\text{t}$.

gap fraction at particle level.

Covariance matrix of gap fraction at particle level.

gap fraction at particle level.

Covariance matrix of gap fraction at particle level.

jet multiplicities for $p_{T}(jet) > 30.0$ GeV.

jet multiplicities for $p_{T}(jet) > 50.0$ GeV.

jet multiplicities for $p_{T}(jet) > 75.0$ GeV.

jet multiplicities for $p_{T}(jet) > 100.0$ GeV.

Covariance matrix of jet multiplicities with different pT(jet) thresholds.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{high})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{high})$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{low})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{low})$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{l})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{l})$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{l})|$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{l})|$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Covariance matrix of absolute cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{high})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{high})$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{low})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{low})$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{l})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{l})$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{l})|$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{l})|$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $|y(\text{t}_\text{h})|$ vs. $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$ vs. $|y(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})|$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Covariance matrix of normalized cross section at the parton level as a function of $p_\text{T}(\text{t}_\text{h})$ vs. $M(\text{t}\bar{\text{t}})$.

Distribution of $m_{jj}$ in data and simulation for events in the signal regions of the low-mass search. The points show the data while the filled histograms show the background contributions. The gray band shows the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background, while the dashed vertical region ("Higgs") shows the expected SM Higgs boson mass range, which is excluded from this analysis. A 600 GeV bulk graviton signal prediction is represented by the black dashed histogram; for visibility, the signal cross-section is increased by a factor of 50. The background normalization is derived from the final fit to the $m_{VZ}$ observable in data.

The m$_{j}$ distributions of the events in data, compared to the expected background shape, for the high-mass analysis in the electron channel, for the high-purity category. The expected background shape is extracted from a fit to the data sidebands (Z+jets) or derived from simulation ("top quark" and "VV"). The dashed region around the background sum represents the uncertainty in the Z+jets distribution, while the dashed vertical region ("Higgs") shows the expected SM Higgs boson mass range, excluded from the analysis.

The m$_{j}$ distributions of the events in data, compared to the expected background shape, for the high-mass analysis in the electron channel, for the low-purity category. The expected background shape is extracted from a fit to the data sidebands (Z+jets) or derived from simulation ("top quark" and "VV"). The dashed region around the background sum represents the uncertainty in the Z+jets distribution, while the dashed vertical region ("Higgs") shows the expected SM Higgs boson mass range, excluded from the analysis.

The m$_{j}$ distributions of the events in data, compared to the expected background shape, for the high-mass analysis in the muon channel, for the high-purity category. The expected background shape is extracted from a fit to the data sidebands (Z+jets) or derived from simulation ("top quark" and "VV"). The dashed region around the background sum represents the uncertainty in the Z+jets distribution, while the dashed vertical region ("Higgs") shows the expected SM Higgs boson mass range, excluded from the analysis.

The m$_{j}$ distributions of the events in data, compared to the expected background shape, for the high-mass analysis in the muon channel, for the low-purity category. The expected background shape is extracted from a fit to the data sidebands (Z+jets) or derived from simulation ("top quark" and "VV"). The dashed region around the background sum represents the uncertainty in the Z+jets distribution, while the dashed vertical region ("Higgs") shows the expected SM Higgs boson mass range, excluded from the analysis.

Expected and observed distributions of the resonance candidate mass $m_{\text{VZ}}$ in the high-mass analysis, in the electron channel, high-purity category. The shaded area represents the post-fit uncertainty in the background. The expected contribution from W' signal candidates with mass $m_{\text{X}} = 2000$ GeV, normalized to a cross section of 100 fb$^{-1}$, is also shown.

Expected and observed distributions of the resonance candidate mass $m_{\text{VZ}}$ in the high-mass analysis, in the electron channel, low-purity category. The shaded area represents the post-fit uncertainty in the background. The expected contribution from W' signal candidates with mass $m_{\text{X}} = 2000$ GeV, normalized to a cross section of 100 fb$^{-1}$, is also shown.

Expected and observed distributions of the resonance candidate mass $m_{\text{VZ}}$ in the high-mass analysis, in the muon channel, high-purity category. The shaded area represents the post-fit uncertainty in the background. The expected contribution from W' signal candidates with mass $m_{\text{X}} = 2000$ GeV, normalized to a cross section of 100 fb$^{-1}$, is also shown.

Expected and observed distributions of the resonance candidate mass $m_{\text{VZ}}$ in the high-mass analysis, in the muon channel, low-purity category. The shaded area represents the post-fit uncertainty in the background. The expected contribution from W' signal candidates with mass $m_{\text{X}} = 2000$ GeV, normalized to a cross section of 100 fb$^{-1}$, is also shown.

Sideband $m_{ZV}$ distribution for the low-mass search in the merged V, untagged category, after fitting the sideband data alone. The points show the data while the filled histograms show the background contributions. Electron and muon categories are combined. The gray band indicates the statistical and post-fit systematic uncertainties in the normalization and shape of the background. Larger bin widths are used at higher values of $m_{ZV}$; the bin widths are indicated by the horizontal error bars.

Sideband $m_{ZV}$ distribution for the low-mass search in the merged V, tagged category, after fitting the sideband data alone. The points show the data while the filled histograms show the background contributions. Electron and muon categories are combined. The gray band indicates the statistical and post-fit systematic uncertainties in the normalization and shape of the background. Larger bin widths are used at higher values of $m_{ZV}$; the bin widths are indicated by the horizontal error bars.

Sideband $m_{ZV}$ distribution for the low-mass search in the resolved V, untagged category, after fitting the sideband data alone. The points show the data while the filled histograms show the background contributions. Electron and muon categories are combined. The gray band indicates the statistical and post-fit systematic uncertainties in the normalization and shape of the background. Larger bin widths are used at higher values of $m_{ZV}$; the bin widths are indicated by the horizontal error bars.

Sideband $m_{ZV}$ distribution for the low-mass search in the resolved V, tagged category, after fitting the sideband data alone. The points show the data while the filled histograms show the background contributions. Electron and muon categories are combined. The gray band indicates the statistical and post-fit systematic uncertainties in the normalization and shape of the background. Larger bin widths are used at higher values of $m_{ZV}$; the bin widths are indicated by the horizontal error bars.

The signal region $m_{VZ}$ distribution for the low-mass search, in the the merged V, untagged category, after fitting the signal and sideband regions. Electron and muon categories are combined. A 600 GeV bulk graviton signal prediction is represented by the black dashed histogram. The gray band indicates the statistical and post-fit systematic uncertainties in the normalization and shape of the background. Larger bin widths are used at higher values of $m_{VZ}$; the bin widths are indicated by the horizontal error bars.

The signal region $m_{VZ}$ distribution for the low-mass search, in the the merged V, tagged category, after fitting the signal and sideband regions. Electron and muon categories are combined. A 600 GeV bulk graviton signal prediction is represented by the black dashed histogram. The gray band indicates the statistical and post-fit systematic uncertainties in the normalization and shape of the background. Larger bin widths are used at higher values of $m_{VZ}$; the bin widths are indicated by the horizontal error bars.

The signal region $m_{VZ}$ distribution for the low-mass search, in the the resolved V, untagged category, after fitting the signal and sideband regions. Electron and muon categories are combined. A 600 GeV bulk graviton signal prediction is represented by the black dashed histogram. The gray band indicates the statistical and post-fit systematic uncertainties in the normalization and shape of the background. Larger bin widths are used at higher values of $m_{VZ}$; the bin widths are indicated by the horizontal error bars.

The signal region $m_{VZ}$ distribution for the low-mass search, in the the resolved V, tagged category, after fitting the signal and sideband regions. Electron and muon categories are combined. A 600 GeV bulk graviton signal prediction is represented by the black dashed histogram. The gray band indicates the statistical and post-fit systematic uncertainties in the normalization and shape of the background. Larger bin widths are used at higher values of $m_{VZ}$; the bin widths are indicated by the horizontal error bars.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limit on $\sigma_{W'} Br(W' \to ZW)$ as a function of the resonance mass, taking into account all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The electron and muon channels and the various categories used in the analysis are combined together. The green (inner) and yellow (outer) bands represent the 68% and 95% coverage of the expected limit in the background-only hypothesis.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limit on $\sigma_{G} Br(G \to ZZ)$ as a function of the resonance mass, taking into account all statistical and systematic uncertainties. The electron and muon channels and the various categories used in the analysis are combined together. The green (inner) and yellow (outer) bands represent the 68% and 95% coverage of the expected limit in the background-only hypothesis.

Observed local p-values for W' narrow resonances as a function of the resonance mass.

Observed local p-values for G narrow resonances as a function of the resonance mass.

The test statistic q as a function of $\mu_{\mathrm{ttH}}$ for all decay modes at 7+8 TeV and at 13 TeV, separately, and for all decay modes at all CM energies. The expected SM result for the overall combination is also shown.

Bin-to-bin correlation in the measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of inclusive jet multiplicity, $N_{\text{jets}}^{\text{min}}$.

Measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the transverse momementum of the Z boson, $p_{\text{T}}(\text{Z})$, for events with at least one jet and breakdown of the relative uncertainty.

Bin-to-bin correlation in the measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the transverse momementum of the Z boson, $p_{\text{T}}(\text{Z})$, for events with at least one jet.

Measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the transverse momenum of the first jet, $p_{\text{T}}(\text{j}_1)$, and breakdown of the relative uncertainty.

Bin-to-bin correlation in the measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the transverse momenum of the first jet, $p_{\text{T}}(\text{j}_1)$.

Measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the transverse momenum of the second jet, $p_{\text{T}}(\text{j}_2)$, and breakdown of the relative uncertainty.

Bin-to-bin correlation in the measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the transverse momenum of the second jet, $p_{\text{T}}(\text{j}_2)$.

Measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the transverse momenum of the third jet, $p_{\text{T}}(\text{j}_3)$, and breakdown of the relative uncertainty.

Bin-to-bin correlation in the measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the transverse momenum of the third jet, $p_{\text{T}}(\text{j}_3)$.

Measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the absolute rapidity of the first jet, $|y(\text{j}_1)|$, and breakdown of the relative uncertainty.

Bin-to-bin correlation in the measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the absolute rapidity of the first jet, $|y(\text{j}_1)|$.

Measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the absolute rapidity of the second jet, $|y(\text{j}_2)|$, and breakdown of the relative uncertainty.

Bin-to-bin correlation in the measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the absolute rapidity of the second jet, $|y(\text{j}_2)|$.

Measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the absolute rapidity of the third jet, $|y(\text{j}_3)|$, and breakdown of the relative uncertainty.

Bin-to-bin correlation in the measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the absolute rapidity of the third jet, $|y(\text{j}_3)|$.

Measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the $H_{\text{T}}$ observable for event with at least one jet and breakdown of the relative uncertainty.

Bin-to-bin correlation in the measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the $H_{\text{T}}$ observable for event with at least one jet.

Measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the $H_{\text{T}}$ observable for event with at least two jets and breakdown of the relative uncertainty.

Bin-to-bin correlation in the measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the $H_{\text{T}}$ observable for event with at least two jets.

Measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the $H_{\text{T}}$ observable for event with at least three jets and breakdown of the relative uncertainty.

Bin-to-bin correlation in the measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the $H_{\text{T}}$ observable for event with at least three jets.

Measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the transverse momentum balance between the Z boson and the accompanying jets, $p_{\text{T}}^{\text{bal}}$, for events with at least one jet and breakdown of the relative uncertainty.

Bin-to-bin correlation in the measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the transverse momentum balance between the Z boson and the accompanying jets, $p_{\text{T}}^{\text{bal}}$, for events with at least one jet.

Measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the transverse momentum balance between the Z boson and the accompanying jets, $p_{\text{T}}^{\text{bal}}$, for events with at least two jets and breakdown of the relative uncertainty.

Bin-to-bin correlation in the measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the transverse momentum balance between the Z boson and the accompanying jets, $p_{\text{T}}^{\text{bal}}$, for events with at least two jets.

Measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the transverse momentum balance between the Z boson and the accompanying jets, $p_{\text{T}}^{\text{bal}}$, for events with at least three jets and breakdown of the relative uncertainty.

Bin-to-bin correlation in the measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the transverse momentum balance between the Z boson and the accompanying jets, $p_{\text{T}}^{\text{bal}}$, for events with at least three jets.

Measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the JZB variable with no restriction on $p_{\text{T}}(\text{Z})$ and breakdown of the relative uncertainty.

Bin-to-bin correlation in the measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the JZB variable with no restriction on $p_{\text{T}}(\text{Z})$.

Measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the JZB variable for $p_{\text{T}}(\text{Z})\leq50\,$GeV) and breakdown of the relative uncertainty.

Bin-to-bin correlation in the measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the JZB variable for $p_{\text{T}}(\text{Z})\leq50\,$GeV).

Measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the JZB variable for $p_{\text{T}}(\text{Z})>50\,$GeV and breakdown of the relative uncertainty.

Bin-to-bin correlation in the measured cross section for Z+jets as a function of the JZB variable for $p_{\text{T}}(\text{Z})>50\,$GeV.

The expected and observed constraints on chargino lifetime and mass. The ratio of the vacuum expectation values of the two Higgs doublets, $\tan \beta$, is fixed to 5 with $\mu > 0$, where $\mu$ is the higgsino mass parameter. The direct chargino production cross section includes both $\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1}$ and $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1}\widetilde{\chi}^\mp_{1}$ production in roughly a 2:1 ratio for all chargino masses considered, and the branching fraction of $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1} \rightarrow \widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}\mathrm{\pi^{\pm}}$ is set to 100%. Chargino masses that are less than those on the curve are excluded at 95% CL.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section for direct production of charginos and their branching fraction to $\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}\mathrm{\pi^{\pm}}$ as a function of chargino mass and lifetime. The ratio of the vacuum expectation values of the two Higgs doublets, $\tan \beta$, is fixed to 5 with $\mu > 0$, where $\mu$ is the higgsino mass parameter. The direct chargino production cross section includes both $\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1}$ and $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1}\widetilde{\chi}^\mp_{1}$ production in roughly a 2:1 ratio for all chargino masses considered, and the branching fraction of $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1} \rightarrow \widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}\mathrm{\pi^{\pm}}$ is set to 100%.

Signal acceptance for each of the generated chargino masses and lifetimes for $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p} \rightarrow \widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1} \widetilde{\chi}^\mp_{1}$ events. The denominator for the acceptance is the total number of $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1} \widetilde{\chi}^\mp_{1}$ events generated, with no generator-level filtering, while the numerator is the number of those events that are selected by the disappearing track signal selection, after being processed with the same reconstruction software used on the data. The acceptance corresponds to the 2015 data-taking period. The uncertainties are only the statistical uncertainties resulting from the sizes of the generated samples.

Signal acceptance for each of the generated chargino masses and lifetimes for $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p} \rightarrow \widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1} \widetilde{\chi}^\mp_{1}$ events. The denominator for the acceptance is the total number of $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1} \widetilde{\chi}^\mp_{1}$ events generated, with no generator-level filtering, while the numerator is the number of those events that are selected by the disappearing track signal selection, after being processed with the same reconstruction software used on the data. The acceptance corresponds to the 2016A data-taking period. The uncertainties are only the statistical uncertainties resulting from the sizes of the generated samples.

Signal acceptance for each of the generated chargino masses and lifetimes for $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p} \rightarrow \widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1} \widetilde{\chi}^\mp_{1}$ events. The denominator for the acceptance is the total number of $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1} \widetilde{\chi}^\mp_{1}$ events generated, with no generator-level filtering, while the numerator is the number of those events that are selected by the disappearing track signal selection, after being processed with the same reconstruction software used on the data. The acceptance corresponds to the 2016B data-taking period. The uncertainties are only the statistical uncertainties resulting from the sizes of the generated samples.

Signal acceptance for each of the generated chargino masses and lifetimes for $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p} \rightarrow \widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1} \widetilde{\chi}^0_{1}$ events. The denominator for the acceptance is the total number of $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1} \widetilde{\chi}^0_{1}$ events generated, with no generator-level filtering, while the numerator is the number of those events that are selected by the disappearing track signal selection, after being processed with the same reconstruction software used on the data. The acceptance corresponds to the 2015 data-taking period. The uncertainties are only the statistical uncertainties resulting from the sizes of the generated samples.

Signal acceptance for each of the generated chargino masses and lifetimes for $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p} \rightarrow \widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1} \widetilde{\chi}^0_{1}$ events. The denominator for the acceptance is the total number of $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1} \widetilde{\chi}^0_{1}$ events generated, with no generator-level filtering, while the numerator is the number of those events that are selected by the disappearing track signal selection, after being processed with the same reconstruction software used on the data. The acceptance corresponds to the 2016A data-taking period. The uncertainties are only the statistical uncertainties resulting from the sizes of the generated samples.

Signal acceptance for each of the generated chargino masses and lifetimes for $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p} \rightarrow \widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1} \widetilde{\chi}^0_{1}$ events. The denominator for the acceptance is the total number of $\widetilde{\chi}^\pm_{1} \widetilde{\chi}^0_{1}$ events generated, with no generator-level filtering, while the numerator is the number of those events that are selected by the disappearing track signal selection, after being processed with the same reconstruction software used on the data. The acceptance corresponds to the 2016B data-taking period. The uncertainties are only the statistical uncertainties resulting from the sizes of the generated samples.

Predicted signal yields for the 2015 data-taking period, corresponding to $2.7\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, after the application of each of the disappearing track selections for three chargino lifetime hypotheses ($\tau = 0.3$, $3.3$, and $33\,\text{ns}{}$) with a chargino mass of $700\,\text{GeV}{}$. The selections listed are cumulative, i.e., only the events and objects passing a given selection are considered in subsequent selections. The uncertainties shown include only the statistical uncertainty resulting from the limited sizes of the generated samples.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016A data-taking period, corresponding to $8.3\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, after the application of each of the disappearing track selections for three chargino lifetime hypotheses ($\tau = 0.3$, $3.3$, and $33\,\text{ns}{}$) with a chargino mass of $700\,\text{GeV}{}$. The selections listed are cumulative, i.e., only the events and objects passing a given selection are considered in subsequent selections. The uncertainties shown include only the statistical uncertainty resulting from the limited sizes of the generated samples.

Predicted signal yields for the 2016B data-taking period, corresponding to $27.4\,\text{fb}^{-1}$, after the application of each of the disappearing track selections for three chargino lifetime hypotheses ($\tau = 0.3$, $3.3$, and $33\,\text{ns}{}$) with a chargino mass of $700\,\text{GeV}{}$. The selections listed are cumulative, i.e., only the events and objects passing a given selection are considered in subsequent selections. The uncertainties shown include only the statistical uncertainty resulting from the limited sizes of the generated samples.