Data vs. the ABCD method background prediction for 2017 in $\mathrm{SR_{b}^{mm}}$. Events are divided by the bin width, hence fractional data counts. Error bars show statistical uncertainties of data. The blue band shows the propagated uncertainty of all individual fit variations in a given bin, which we consider to be uncorrelated. The lower panels show the ratio of the observed data to the background estimation.

Data vs. the ABCD method background prediction for 2018 in $\mathrm{SR_{b}^{mm}}$. Events are divided by the bin width, hence fractional data counts. Error bars show statistical uncertainties of data. The blue band shows the propagated uncertainty of all individual fit variations in a given bin, which we consider to be uncorrelated. The lower panels show the ratio of the observed data to the background estimation.

Data vs. the ABCD method background prediction for 2016 in $\mathrm{SR_{b+\textrm{j}/b}^{mm}}$. Events are divided by the bin width, hence fractional data counts. Error bars show statistical uncertainties of data. The blue band shows the propagated uncertainty of all individual fit variations in a given bin, which we consider to be uncorrelated. The lower panels show the ratio of the observed data to the background estimation.

Data vs. the ABCD method background prediction for 2017 in $\mathrm{SR_{b+\textrm{j}/b}^{mm}}$. Events are divided by the bin width, hence fractional data counts. Error bars show statistical uncertainties of data. The blue band shows the propagated uncertainty of all individual fit variations in a given bin, which we consider to be uncorrelated. The lower panels show the ratio of the observed data to the background estimation.

Data vs. the ABCD method background prediction for 2018 in $\mathrm{SR_{b+\textrm{j}/b}^{mm}}$. Events are divided by the bin width, hence fractional data counts. Error bars show statistical uncertainties of data. The blue band shows the propagated uncertainty of all individual fit variations in a given bin, which we consider to be uncorrelated. The lower panels show the ratio of the observed data to the background estimation.

The asymptotic 95% CL limits on the product of cross section ($\sigma$), branching fraction into a pair of muons ($\mathcal{B}$) to dimuons, acceptance (A), and efficiency ($\epsilon$) in $\mathrm{SR_{b}^{mm}}$. A combination of both limits depends on the relative acceptance contributions in each region and is omitted here.

The asymptotic 95% CL limits on the product of cross section ($\sigma$), branching fraction into a pair of muons ($\mathcal{B}$) to dimuons, acceptance (A), and efficiency ($\epsilon$) in $\mathrm{SR_{b+\textrm{j}/b}^{mm}}$. A combination of both limits depends on the relative acceptance contributions in each region and is omitted here.

Cutflow for signal samples in 2016. Samples are divided by generated mass, signal region, and the b to s quark flavor changing coupling of the $Z^\prime$, dbs. For some mass values, multiple values of this coupling strength have been generated. It is described in this minimal lagrangian: $\mathcal{L} \supset Z^{\prime}_{\eta} \Big[ g_{\mu}\, \bar{\mu}\, \gamma^{\eta}\, \mu + \big( g_b\, \delta_{bs}\, \bar{s}\, \gamma^{\eta}\, P_{L}\, b + \text{h.c.} \big) \Big]$. The cutflow shows the selection into signal regions, and then the effects of specialized HTLT and RelMET selections, which grow with greater mass.

Cutflow for signal samples in 2017. Samples are divided by generated mass, signal region, and the b to s quark flavor changing coupling of the $Z^\prime$, dbs. For some mass values, multiple values of this coupling strength have been generated. It is described in this minimal lagrangian: $\mathcal{L} \supset Z^{\prime}_{\eta} \Big[ g_{\mu}\, \bar{\mu}\, \gamma^{\eta}\, \mu + \big( g_b\, \delta_{bs}\, \bar{s}\, \gamma^{\eta}\, P_{L}\, b + \text{h.c.} \big) \Big]$. The cutflow shows the selection into signal regions, and then the effects of specialized HTLT and RelMET selections, which grow with greater mass.

Cutflow for signal samples in 2018. Samples are divided by generated mass, signal region, and the b to s quark flavor changing coupling of the $Z^\prime$, dbs. For some mass values, multiple values of this coupling strength have been generated. It is described in this minimal lagrangian: $\mathcal{L} \supset Z^{\prime}_{\eta} \Big[ g_{\mu}\, \bar{\mu}\, \gamma^{\eta}\, \mu + \big( g_b\, \delta_{bs}\, \bar{s}\, \gamma^{\eta}\, P_{L}\, b + \text{h.c.} \big) \Big]$. The cutflow shows the selection into signal regions, and then the effects of specialized HTLT and RelMET selections, which grow with greater mass.

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.

Observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the cross section and branching fraction squared, $\sigma (\tilde{\mathrm{t}} \, \bar{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}}) \, \mathcal{B}^{2} ( \tilde{\mathrm{t}} \rightarrow \mathrm{c} \tilde{\chi}_1^0 )$ (left panel), are shown using the color scale where the $\tilde{\mathrm{t}}$ mass is on the $x$-axis and the mass difference between the $\tilde{\mathrm{t}}$ and the LSP is on the $y$-axis. The expected lower mass limits (magenta line) together with their $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties (magenta dashed lines) and the observed lower mass limits (black line) are indicated for 100% branching fractions.

Chargino-neutralino production. Observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the cross section and the two branching fractions, $\sigma (\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0) \, \mathcal{B} ( \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \rightarrow \mathrm{W}^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_1^0 ) \, \mathcal{B} ( \tilde{\chi}_2^0 \rightarrow \mathrm{Z} \tilde{\chi}_1^0 )$, are shown using the color scale where the $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm/\tilde{\chi}_2^0$ mass is on the $x$-axis and the mass difference between the $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm/\tilde{\chi}_2^0$ and the LSP is on the $y$-axis. For these results, based on the TChiWZ simplified model, the $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm$ and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0$ masses are set equal. The expected lower mass limits (magenta line) together with their $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties (magenta dashed lines) and the observed lower mass limits (black line) are indicated for 100% branching fractions for Wino-like cross-sections (left panel) and for Higgsino-like cross-sections (right panel).

Chargino-neutralino production. Observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the cross section and the two branching fractions, $\sigma (\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}_2^0) \, \mathcal{B} ( \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \rightarrow \mathrm{W}^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_1^0 ) \, \mathcal{B} ( \tilde{\chi}_2^0 \rightarrow \mathrm{Z} \tilde{\chi}_1^0 )$, are shown using the color scale where the $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm/\tilde{\chi}_2^0$ mass is on the $x$-axis and the mass difference between the $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm/\tilde{\chi}_2^0$ and the LSP is on the $y$-axis. For these results, based on the TChiWZ simplified model, the $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm$ and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0$ masses are set equal. The expected lower mass limits (magenta line) together with their $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties (magenta dashed lines) and the observed lower mass limits (black line) are indicated for 100% branching fractions for Wino-like cross-sections (left panel) and for Higgsino-like cross-sections (right panel).

Chargino pair production. The left panel shows the observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the cross section and the branching fraction squared, $\sigma (\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^- ) \, \mathcal{B}^{2} ( \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \rightarrow \mathrm{W}^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_1^0 ) $ are shown using the color scale where the $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm$ mass is on the $x$-axis and the mass difference between the $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ and the LSP is on the $y$-axis. The expected lower mass limits (magenta line) together with their $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties (magenta dashed lines) and the observed lower mass limits (black line) are indicated for 100% branching fractions for Wino-like cross-sections. The right panel shows the results for chargino pair production with decays as in the TChiSlepSnu model with democratic decay via an intermediate sneutrino or charged slepton ($\widetilde{\ell}^{\pm}_{\mathrm{L}}$) with mass halfway between the chargino and the lightest neutralino. These model predictions also assume Wino-like cross sections.

Chargino pair production. The left panel shows the observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the cross section and the branching fraction squared, $\sigma (\tilde{\chi}_1^+ \tilde{\chi}_1^- ) \, \mathcal{B}^{2} ( \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \rightarrow \mathrm{W}^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}_1^0 ) $ are shown using the color scale where the $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm$ mass is on the $x$-axis and the mass difference between the $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ and the LSP is on the $y$-axis. The expected lower mass limits (magenta line) together with their $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties (magenta dashed lines) and the observed lower mass limits (black line) are indicated for 100% branching fractions for Wino-like cross-sections. The right panel shows the results for chargino pair production with decays as in the TChiSlepSnu model with democratic decay via an intermediate sneutrino or charged slepton ($\widetilde{\ell}^{\pm}_{\mathrm{L}}$) with mass halfway between the chargino and the lightest neutralino. These model predictions also assume Wino-like cross sections.

Slepton pair production. Observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section and branching fraction squared for direct slepton pair production followed by decay of both sleptons to the corresponding lepton and neutralino (color scale). Slepton $\tilde{l}_{\mathrm{L}/\mathrm{R}}$ indicates the scalar supersymmetric partner of left- and right-handed electrons and muons. The limit is shown as a function of the slepton mass and the mass difference between the slepton and the lightest neutralino. The regions to the left of the lines denote the regions excluded for a branching fraction of 100%. The median expected exclusion regions for 100% branching fraction are delimited by the dashed lines.

Slepton pair production. Observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section and branching fraction squared for direct slepton pair production followed by decay of both sleptons to the corresponding lepton and neutralino (color scale). Slepton $\tilde{l}_{\mathrm{L}/\mathrm{R}}$ indicates the scalar supersymmetric partner of left- and right-handed electrons and muons. The limit is shown as a function of the slepton mass and the mass difference between the slepton and the lightest neutralino. The regions to the left of the lines denote the regions excluded for a branching fraction of 100%. The median expected exclusion regions for 100% branching fraction are delimited by the dashed lines.

Slepton pair production. Observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section and branching fraction squared for direct slepton pair production followed by decay of both sleptons to the corresponding lepton and neutralino (color scale). Slepton $\tilde{l}_{\mathrm{L}/\mathrm{R}}$ indicates the scalar supersymmetric partner of left- and right-handed electrons and muons. The limit is shown as a function of the slepton mass and the mass difference between the slepton and the lightest neutralino. The regions to the left of the lines denote the regions excluded for a branching fraction of 100%. The median expected exclusion regions for 100% branching fraction are delimited by the dashed lines.

Slepton pair production. Observed 95% CL upper limits on the cross section times branching fraction squared for direct selectron pair production (left) and smuon pair production (right) followed by decay of both sleptons to the corresponding lepton and neutralino (color scale). The limits are shown as a function of the slepton mass and the mass difference between the slepton and the lightest neutralino for the three different simplified possibilities of only RR, only LL, and both RR and LL where it is assumed that the R and L masses are identical. The regions to the left of the lines denote the regions excluded for a branching fraction of 100%. Median expected limits for 100% branching fraction are delimited by the dashed lines.

Slepton pair production. Observed 95% CL upper limits on the cross section times branching fraction squared for direct selectron pair production (left) and smuon pair production (right) followed by decay of both sleptons to the corresponding lepton and neutralino (color scale). The limits are shown as a function of the slepton mass and the mass difference between the slepton and the lightest neutralino for the three different simplified possibilities of only RR, only LL, and both RR and LL where it is assumed that the R and L masses are identical. The regions to the left of the lines denote the regions excluded for a branching fraction of 100%. Median expected limits for 100% branching fraction are delimited by the dashed lines.

Slepton pair production. Observed 95% CL upper limits on the cross section times branching fraction squared for direct selectron pair production (left) and smuon pair production (right) followed by decay of both sleptons to the corresponding lepton and neutralino (color scale). The limits are shown as a function of the slepton mass and the mass difference between the slepton and the lightest neutralino for the three different simplified possibilities of only RR, only LL, and both RR and LL where it is assumed that the R and L masses are identical. The regions to the left of the lines denote the regions excluded for a branching fraction of 100%. Median expected limits for 100% branching fraction are delimited by the dashed lines.

Slepton pair production. Observed 95% CL upper limits on the cross section times branching fraction squared for direct selectron pair production (left) and smuon pair production (right) followed by decay of both sleptons to the corresponding lepton and neutralino (color scale). The limits are shown as a function of the slepton mass and the mass difference between the slepton and the lightest neutralino for the three different simplified possibilities of only RR, only LL, and both RR and LL where it is assumed that the R and L masses are identical. The regions to the left of the lines denote the regions excluded for a branching fraction of 100%. Median expected limits for 100% branching fraction are delimited by the dashed lines.

Slepton pair production. Observed 95% CL upper limits on the cross section times branching fraction squared for direct selectron pair production (left) and smuon pair production (right) followed by decay of both sleptons to the corresponding lepton and neutralino (color scale). The limits are shown as a function of the slepton mass and the mass difference between the slepton and the lightest neutralino for the three different simplified possibilities of only RR, only LL, and both RR and LL where it is assumed that the R and L masses are identical. The regions to the left of the lines denote the regions excluded for a branching fraction of 100%. Median expected limits for 100% branching fraction are delimited by the dashed lines.

Slepton pair production. Observed 95% CL upper limits on the cross section times branching fraction squared for direct selectron pair production (left) and smuon pair production (right) followed by decay of both sleptons to the corresponding lepton and neutralino (color scale). The limits are shown as a function of the slepton mass and the mass difference between the slepton and the lightest neutralino for the three different simplified possibilities of only RR, only LL, and both RR and LL where it is assumed that the R and L masses are identical. The regions to the left of the lines denote the regions excluded for a branching fraction of 100%. Median expected limits for 100% branching fraction are delimited by the dashed lines.

The observed and expected upper limits at 95% CLs on $\sigma (\mathrm{pp} \to \mathrm{H}+\text{X}) {\mathcal{B}} (\mathrm{H} \to \mathrm{a}_1\,\mathrm{a}_1)$, relative to $\sigma_\text{SM}$, as a function of $m_{\mathrm{a}_1}$ for Type III 2HD+S model, $\tan\beta = 2$.

The observed and expected upper limits at 95% CLs on $\sigma (\mathrm{pp} \to \mathrm{H}+\text{X}) {\mathcal{B}} (\mathrm{H} \to \mathrm{a}_1\,\mathrm{a}_1)$, relative to $\sigma_\text{SM}$, as a function of $m_{\mathrm{a}_1}$ for Type IV 2HD+S model, $\tan\beta = 0.5$.

The observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{pp} \to \mathrm{H}+\text{X}) {\mathcal{B}} (\mathrm{H} \to \mathrm{a}_1\,\mathrm{a}_1)$, relative to $\sigma_\text{SM}$, as a function of $\tan\beta$ for the Type II 2HD+S model for $m_{\mathrm{a}_1} = 5$ GeV.

The observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{pp} \to \mathrm{H}+\text{X}) {\mathcal{B}} (\mathrm{H} \to \mathrm{a}_1\,\mathrm{a}_1)$, relative to $\sigma_\text{SM}$, as a function of $\tan\beta$ for the Type II 2HD+S model for $m_{\mathrm{a}_1} = 8$ GeV.

The observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{pp} \to \mathrm{H}+\text{X}) {\mathcal{B}} (\mathrm{H} \to \mathrm{a}_1\,\mathrm{a}_1)$, relative to $\sigma_\text{SM}$, as a function of $\tan\beta$ for the Type II 2HD+S model for $m_{\mathrm{a}_1} = 12$ GeV.

The observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{pp} \to \mathrm{H}+\text{X}) {\mathcal{B}} (\mathrm{H} \to \mathrm{a}_1\,\mathrm{a}_1)$, relative to $\sigma_\text{SM}$, as a function of $\tan\beta$ for the Type II 2HD+S model for $m_{\mathrm{a}_1} = 15$ GeV.

The observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{pp} \to \mathrm{H}+\text{X}) {\mathcal{B}} (\mathrm{H} \to \mathrm{a}_1\,\mathrm{a}_1)$, relative to $\sigma_\text{SM}$, as a function of $\tan\beta$ for the Type III 2HD+S model for $m_{\mathrm{a}_1} = 5$ GeV.

The observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{pp} \to \mathrm{H}+\text{X}) {\mathcal{B}} (\mathrm{H} \to \mathrm{a}_1\,\mathrm{a}_1)$, relative to $\sigma_\text{SM}$, as a function of $\tan\beta$ for the Type III 2HD+S model for $m_{\mathrm{a}_1} = 8$ GeV.

The observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{pp} \to \mathrm{H}+\text{X}) {\mathcal{B}} (\mathrm{H} \to \mathrm{a}_1\,\mathrm{a}_1)$, relative to $\sigma_\text{SM}$, as a function of $\tan\beta$ for the Type III 2HD+S model for $m_{\mathrm{a}_1} = 12$ GeV.

The observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma (\mathrm{pp} \to \mathrm{H}+\text{X}) {\mathcal{B}} (\mathrm{H} \to \mathrm{a}_1\,\mathrm{a}_1)$, relative to $\sigma_\text{SM}$, as a function of $\tan\beta$ for the Type III 2HD+S model for $m_{\mathrm{a}_1} = 15$ GeV.

The distributions of the $\mathrm{D}^{*}-\mathrm{D}^0$ mass difference $\Delta m$ for the normalization channel in data.

The distributions of the dimuon invariant mass $m_{\mu\mu}$ for the signal channel in data with the requirement $0.145<\Delta m<0.146$ GeV.

The distributions of the $\mathrm{D}^{*}-\mathrm{D}^0$ mass difference $\Delta m$ for the signal channel in data with the requirement $1.84<m_{\mu\mu}<1.89$ GeV.

The post-fit event yields for the signal, the combinatorial background, the $\mathrm{D}^0\to\pi^+\pi^-$ background, and the $\mathrm{D}^0\to\pi^-\mu^+\nu$ background. The observed numbers of events are given in the Data column. The subrange is in one dimension with a full range in the other dimension.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{lead.\,lep.}}$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{sub-lead.\,lep.}}$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{sub-lead.\,lep.}}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{sub-lead.\,lep.}}$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $|y_{e\mu}|$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|y_{e\mu}|$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|y_{e\mu}|$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $m_{e\mu}$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $m_{e\mu}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $m_{e\mu}$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $|\Delta\phi_{e\mu}|$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|\Delta\phi_{e\mu}|$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|\Delta\phi_{e\mu}|$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $\cos(\theta^{*})$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $\cos(\theta^{*})$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $\cos(\theta^{*})$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{lep}+\mathrm{MET}}$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{lep}+\mathrm{MET}}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{lep}+\mathrm{MET}}$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $m_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $m_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $m_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of the number of jets. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable Number of jets ($p_{\mathrm{T}} > $ 30 GeV).

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable Number of jets ($p_{\mathrm{T}} > $ 30 GeV).

Fiducial differential cross-sections as a function of $S_{\mathrm{T}}$. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The results are compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1, with the NNLO + PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO + Pythia8 and Geneva + Pythia8, as well as Sherpa2.2.12 NLO + PS predictions. The last three predictions are combined with Sherpa 2.2.2 for the $gg$ initial state and Sherpa 2.2.12 for electroweak $WWjj$ production. These contributions are modelled at LO but a NLO QCD $k$-factor of 1.7 is applied for gluon induced production. Theoretical predictions are indicated as markers with vertical lines denoting PDF, scale and parton shower uncertainties. Markers are staggered for better visibility.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $S_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $S_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Fiducial differential cross-sections for $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ in the region with 85 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 150, for the nNNLO MATRIX prediction and various four flavour PDF sets. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The measurement is compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1 using four different four-flavour NNLO PDF sets: NNPDF3.0, NNPDF3.1, CT18, and MSHT20.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ (85 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 150).

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ (85 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 150).

Fiducial differential cross-sections for $|y_{e\mu}|$ in the region with 85 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 150, for the nNNLO MATRIX prediction and various four flavour PDF sets. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The measurement is compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1 using four different four-flavour NNLO PDF sets: NNPDF3.0, NNPDF3.1, CT18, and MSHT20.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|y_{e\mu}|$ (85 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 150).

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|y_{e\mu}|$ (85 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 150).

Fiducial differential cross-sections for $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ in the region with 150 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 250, for the nNNLO MATRIX prediction and various four flavour PDF sets. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The measurement is compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1 using four different four-flavour NNLO PDF sets: NNPDF3.0, NNPDF3.1, CT18, and MSHT20.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ (150 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 250).

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ (150 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 250).

Fiducial differential cross-sections for $|y_{e\mu}|$ in the region with 150 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 250, for the nNNLO MATRIX prediction and various four flavour PDF sets. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The measurement is compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1 using four different four-flavour NNLO PDF sets: NNPDF3.0, NNPDF3.1, CT18, and MSHT20.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|y_{e\mu}|$ (150 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 250).

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|y_{e\mu}|$ (150 $<m_{e\mu}<$ 250).

Fiducial differential cross-sections for $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ in the region with $m_{e\mu}>$ 250, for the nNNLO MATRIX prediction and various four flavour PDF sets. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The right-hand-side axis indicates the integrated cross-section of the rightmost bin. The measurement is compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1 using four different four-flavour NNLO PDF sets: NNPDF3.0, NNPDF3.1, CT18, and MSHT20.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ ($m_{e\mu}>$ 250).

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $p_{\mathrm{T},e\mu}$ ($m_{e\mu}>$ 250).

Fiducial differential cross-sections for $|y_{e\mu}|$ in the region with $m_{e\mu}>$ 250, for the nNNLO MATRIX prediction and various four flavour PDF sets. The measured cross-section values are shown as points with error bars giving the statistical uncertainty and solid bands indicating the size of the total uncertainty. The measurement is compared to fixed-order nNNLO QCD + NLO EW predictions of Matrix 2.1 using four different four-flavour NNLO PDF sets: NNPDF3.0, NNPDF3.1, CT18, and MSHT20.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|y_{e\mu}|$ ($m_{e\mu}>$ 250).

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $|y_{e\mu}|$ ($m_{e\mu}>$ 250).

Measured value of the charge asymmetry, $A_{C}$.

Charge asymmetry $A_C$ measured as a function of the absolute difference of the absolute lepton rapidities $||\eta_{l+}|-|\eta_{l-}||$. The measured values are shown as points, whose error bars represent the statistical uncertainty, while the solid bands indicate the size of the total uncertainty. In the bottom panel, the central value of the charge asymmetry divided by the total uncertainty of the $A_C$ measurement is shown. The measurement is compared with the NNLO+PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO+Pythia8 with vertical lines denoting PDF uncertainties.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $A_{C}$ vs. $||\eta_{l+}|-|\eta_{l-}||$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $A_{C}$ vs. $||\eta_{l+}|-|\eta_{l-}||$.

Charge asymmetry $A_C$ measured as a function of the invariant mass of the dilepton system $m_{e\mu}$. The measured values are shown as points, whose error bars represent the statistical uncertainty, while the solid bands indicate the size of the total uncertainty. In the bottom panel, the central value of the charge asymmetry divided by the total uncertainty of the $A_C$ measurement is shown. The measurement is compared with the NNLO+PS predictions from Powheg MiNNLO+Pythia8 with vertical lines denoting PDF uncertainties.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $A_{C}$ vs. $m_{e\mu}$.

Correlation matrix of the total uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section for the observable $A_{C}$ vs. $m_{e\mu}$.

Measured value of the asymmetry in the CP-odd observable $O_{z}$, $A_{CP}$.

The 95% CL limits on the cross-section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow Z' \rightarrow \chi \chi$) times branching ratio B in fb with all statistical and systematic uncertainties, for the $R_{\text{inv}}=$0.6 signal points.

Data yield in the PFN signal region.

Yield of data in the ANTELOPE signal region in the binning used for BumpHunter fitting.

Upper limits at $95\%$ CL on the LQ-fermion couplings, $|y_{e u}|$, versus $S_{e u}$ mass for scalar LQs coupled to electrons.

Observed and Expected UL exclusions on the $BR(H\to S)$ of generic signals with $m_{A'} = 1.0\;GeV$ and $BR(A' \rightarrow \pi\pi) = 1.0$.

The observed data in the dielectron channel and the fitted signal-plus-background templates, shown for the $S_{e d}$ scenario with a candidate LQ mass of 2.5 TeV. Distributions of events are binned in the reconstructed dilepton mass, rapidity, and cosine theta.

Observed and Expected UL exclusions on the number of 'signal' yields in sideband A from the model agnostic fit, assuming no 'SUEP-like' signal contamination in the CRs.

Upper limits at $95\%$ CL on the LQ-fermion couplings, $|y_{e d}|$, versus $S_{e d}$ mass for scalar LQs coupled to electrons.

Postfit values for SR in the B-Only CR+SR and CR-Only fits with the prefit signal overlayed for reference

The observed data in the dimuon channel and the fitted signal-plus-background templates, shown for the $S_{\mu u}$ scenario with a candidate LQ mass of 2.5 TeV. Distributions of events are binned in the reconstructed dilepton mass, rapidity, and cosine theta.

Postfit values for PR in the B-Only CR+SR and CR-Only fits with the prefit signal overlayed for reference

Upper limits at $95\%$ CL on the LQ-fermion couplings, $|y_{\mu u}|$, versus $S_{\mu u}$ mass for scalar LQs coupled to muons.

Postfit values for CRDY in the B-Only CR+SR and CR-Only fits with the prefit signal overlayed for reference

The observed data in the dimuon channel and the fitted signal-plus-background templates, shown for the $S_{\mu d}$ scenario with a candidate LQ mass of 2.5 TeV. Distributions of events are binned in the reconstructed dilepton mass, rapidity, and cosine theta.

Postfit values for CRTT in the B-Only CR+SR and CR-Only fits with the prefit signal overlayed for reference

Upper limits at $95\%$ CL on the LQ-fermion couplings, $|y_{\mu d}|$, versus $S_{\mu d}$ mass for scalar LQs coupled to muons.

Per-selection efficiencies on Generic - $m_{A'} = 1.0\;GeV$ $BR(A' \rightarrow \pi\pi) = 1.0$ Hadronic - $m_{A'} = 0.7\;GeV$ and $BR(A' \rightarrow ee) = BR(A' \rightarrow \mu\mu) = 0.15$ $BR(A' \rightarrow \pi\pi) = 0.7$ Leptonic - $m_{A'} = 0.5\;GeV$ and $BR(A' \rightarrow ee) = BR(A' \rightarrow \mu\mu) = 0.2$ and $BR(A' \rightarrow \pi\pi) = 0.6$ samples. Selections: 2 OSSF leptons, one SUEP cluster, $60\leq Z_{m}\leq 120$ GeV, $p_{T}^Z\geq 25$ GeV, veto events with b-tagged jets, $p_{T}^{SUEP} > 60\;GeV$, and $dR^{Ak4}_{Ak15} < 1.5$. Efficiencies are the ratio of the histogram size at the selection step to the previous step (except twoLepton vs. initial). The final column is the total cumulative efficiency (dR vs. initial). Note that these selection numbers were all calculated using samples generated with 600,000 events for each signal point considered.

The observed data in the dielectron channel and the fitted signal-plus-background templates, shown for the $V_{e u}$ scenario with a candidate LQ mass of 2.5 TeV. Distributions of events are binned in the reconstructed dilepton mass, rapidity, and cosine theta.

Interpolated observed and expected UL exclusions on $BR(H\to S) = 1$ for generic signals with $m_{A'} = 1.0\;GeV$ and $BR(A' \rightarrow \pi\pi) = 1.0$. The discreate heatmap points can be found in the UL Generic (Observed & Expected) figure in this sandbox

Upper limits at $95\%$ CL on the LQ-fermion couplings, $|g_{e u}|$, versus $V_{e u}$ mass for vector LQs coupled to electrons.

The observed data in the dielectron channel and the fitted signal-plus-background templates, shown for the $V_{e d}$ scenario with a candidate LQ mass of 2.5 TeV. Distributions of events are binned in the reconstructed dilepton mass, rapidity, and cosine theta.

Upper limits at $95\%$ CL on the LQ-fermion couplings, $|g_{e d}|$, versus $V_{e d}$ mass for vector LQs coupled to electrons.

The observed data in the dimuon channel and the fitted signal-plus-background templates, shown for the $V_{\mu u}$ scenario with a candidate LQ mass of 2.5 TeV. Distributions of events are binned in the reconstructed dilepton mass, rapidity, and cosine theta.

Upper limits at $95\%$ CL on the LQ-fermion couplings, $|g_{\mu u}|$, versus $V_{\mu u}$ mass for vector LQs coupled to muons.

The observed data in the dimuon channel and the fitted signal-plus-background templates, shown for the $V_{\mu d}$ scenario with a candidate LQ mass of 2.5 TeV. Distributions of events are binned in the reconstructed dilepton mass, rapidity, and cosine theta.

Upper limits at $95\%$ CL on the LQ-fermion couplings, $|g_{\mu d}|$, versus $V_{\mu d}$ mass for vector LQs coupled to muons.