Correlation matrix of all the parameters including nuisance parameters used in the profile likelihood unfolding fit on $A_{C}$.

The unfolded differential charge asymmetry as a function of the transverse momentum of the top pair system. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NNLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The scale uncertainty is obtained by varying renormalisation and factorisation scales independently by a factor of 2 or 0.5 around $\mu_0$ to calculate the maximum and minimum value of the asymmetry, respectively. The nominal value $\mu_0$ is chosen as $H_T/4$. The variations in which one scale is multiplied by 2 while the other scale is divided by 2 are excluded. Finally, the scale and MC integration uncertainties are added in quadrature.

The unfolded differential charge asymmetry as a function of the longitudinal boost of the top pair system. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NNLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The scale uncertainty is obtained by varying renormalisation and factorisation scales independently by a factor of 2 or 0.5 around $\mu_0$ to calculate the maximum and minimum value of the asymmetry, respectively. The nominal value $\mu_0$ is chosen as $H_T/4$. The variations in which one scale is multiplied by 2 while the other scale is divided by 2 are excluded. Finally, the scale and MC integration uncertainties are added in quadrature.

The unfolded inclusive leptonic asymmetry. The unfolded $A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ is obtained in the reduced phase-space defined by the requirement $|\Delta |\eta_{\ell\bar{\ell}}||<2.5$. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The theory uncertainty is obtained by varying both scales by a factor of 0.5 or 2.0 to calculate the minimum and maximum value of the asymmetry, respectively.

The unfolded differential leptonic asymmetry as a function of the invariant mass of the di-lepton pair. The unfolded $A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ is obtained in the reduced phase-space defined by the requirement $|\Delta |\eta_{\ell\bar{\ell}}||<2.5$. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The theory uncertainty is obtained by varying both scales by a factor of 0.5 or 2.0 to calculate the minimum and maximum value of the asymmetry, respectively.

The unfolded differential leptonic asymmetry as a function of the transverse momentum of the di-lepton pair. The unfolded $A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ is obtained in the reduced phase-space defined by the requirement $|\Delta |\eta_{\ell\bar{\ell}}||<2.5$. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The theory uncertainty is obtained by varying both scales by a factor of 0.5 or 2.0 to calculate the minimum and maximum value of the asymmetry, respectively.

The unfolded differential leptonic asymmetry as a function of the longitudinal boost of the di-lepton pair. The unfolded $A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ is obtained in the reduced phase-space defined by the requirement $|\Delta |\eta_{\ell\bar{\ell}}||<2.5$. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The theory uncertainty is obtained by varying both scales by a factor of 0.5 or 2.0 to calculate the minimum and maximum value of the asymmetry, respectively.

Individual 68% and 95% CL bounds on the relevant Wilson coefficients of the SM Effective Field Theory in units of $\text{TeV}^{-2}$. The bounds are derived from the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ inclusive measurement. The experimental uncertainties are accounted for, in the form of the complete covariance matrix that keeps track of correlations between bins for the differential measurement. The theory uncertainty from the NNLO QCD + NLO EW calculation is included by explicitly varying the renormalization and factorization scales, or the parton density functions, in the calculation and registering the variations in the intervals.

Individual 68% and 95% CL bounds on the relevant Wilson coefficients of the SM Effective Field Theory in units of $\text{TeV}^{-2}$. The bounds are derived from the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement. The experimental uncertainties are accounted for, in the form of the complete covariance matrix that keeps track of correlations between bins for the differential measurement. The theory uncertainty from the NNLO QCD + NLO EW calculation is included by explicitly varying the renormalization and factorization scales, or the parton density functions, in the calculation and registering the variations in the intervals.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ inclusive measurement. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [0,0.3]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [0.3,0.6]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [0.6,0.8]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [0.8,1]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $m_{t\bar{t}}$ < 500 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $m_{t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [500,750] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $m_{t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [750,1000] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $m_{t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [1000,1500] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $m_{t\bar{t}}$ > 1500 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ < 30 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [30,120] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ > 120 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ inclusive measurement. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$[0,0.3]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$[0.3,0.6]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$[0.6,0.8]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$[0.8,1]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ < 200 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$ [200,300] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$ [300,400] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ > 400 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ < 20 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$ [20, 70] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ > 70 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ inclusive measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.

Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.

Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.

Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.

Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ inclusive measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.

Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.

Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.

Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.

Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement. The total (stat. + syst.) uncertainties are considered.

Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ measurement. The total (stat. + syst.) uncertainties are considered.

Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement. The total (stat. + syst.) uncertainties are considered.

Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement. The total (stat. + syst.) uncertainties are considered.

Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement. The total (stat. + syst.) uncertainties are considered.

Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement. The total (stat. + syst.) uncertainties are considered.

The covariance matrix for the kinematic bins matrix of the $D_s^+$ production asymmetry measured using the combined $\sqrt{s} =7$ and 8 TeV data sets (corresponding to Table 1). The statistical and systematic uncertainties are combined. The kinematic bins are indexed as follows: the three rapidity bins, y, in the range from 2.0 to 4.5 are indexed with $i_y$ ranging from 0 to 2 with the following bin edges: 2.0, 3.0, 3.5, 4.5. The four $p_{\rm T}$ bins in the range from 2.5 to 25.0 GeV/c are indexed with $i_{p_T}$ from 0 to 3 with the following bin edges: 2.5, 4.7, 6.5, 8.5, 25.0 GeV/c. The index of a kinematic bins is then given by: $i_{\rm bin} = 4 \times i_y + i_{p_T}$.

The covariance matrix for the kinematic bins matrix of the $D_s^+$ production asymmetry measured using the $\sqrt{s} =7$ TeV data set (corresponding to Table 2). The statistical and systematic uncertainties are combined. The kinematic bins are indexed as follows: the three rapidity bins, y, in the range from 2.0 to 4.5 are indexed with $i_y$ ranging from 0 to 2 with the following bin edges: 2.0, 3.0, 3.5, 4.5. The four $p_{\rm T}$ bins in the range from 2.5 to 25.0 GeV/c are indexed with $i_{p_T}$ from 0 to 3 with the following bin edges: 2.5, 4.7, 6.5, 8.5, 25.0 GeV/c. The index of a kinematic bins is then given by: $i_{\rm bin} = 4 \times i_y + i_{p_T}$.

The covariance matrix for the kinematic bins matrix of the $D_s^+$ production asymmetry measured using the $\sqrt{s} =8$ TeV data set (corresponding to Table 3). The statistical and systematic uncertainties are combined. The kinematic bins are indexed as follows: the three rapidity bins, y, in the range from 2.0 to 4.5 are indexed with $i_y$ ranging from 0 to 2 with the following bin edges: 2.0, 3.0, 3.5, 4.5. The four $p_{\rm T}$ bins in the range from 2.5 to 25.0 GeV/c are indexed with $i_{p_T}$ from 0 to 3 with the following bin edges: 2.5, 4.7, 6.5, 8.5, 25.0 GeV/c. The index of a kinematic bins is then given by: $i_{\rm bin} = 4 \times i_y + i_{p_T}$.

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2254987 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2290003 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2324995 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2355029 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2389989 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2425001 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2455020 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2484967 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2514991 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2550029 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2584969 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2614979 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2644992 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2675008 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2705027 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2739984 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2774992 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2804996 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2835003 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2864940 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2895026 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2924970 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2954989 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.2989995 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3024980 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3054984 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3084992 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3115002 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3145016 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3175032 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3204980 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3235001 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3265026 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3294983 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3325013 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3354976 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3385012 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3414981 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3445022 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3474997 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3504974 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3535024 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3565007 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3594993 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3624982 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3654974 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3684968 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3714966 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3744966 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3774969 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3804974 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3834983 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3864994 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3890010 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3914981 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3945022 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.3974998 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4004978 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4035026 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4065011 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4094998 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4119939 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4144969 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4174985 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4205005 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4235027 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4259986 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4284967 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4315018 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4345006 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4374997 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4399974 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4424973 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4454993 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W=1.4485015 GeV

Optimised angular observables evaluated by the unbinned maximum likelihood fit. The first uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic.

CP-averaged angular observables evaluated using the method of moments. The first uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic.

CP-asymmetries evaluated using the method of moments. The first uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic.

Optimised observables evaluated using the method of moments. The first uncertainties are statistical and the second systematic.

Zero-crossing points determined with an amplitude fit.

Likelihood correlation matrix $0.1 < q^2 < 0.98~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $1.1 < q^2 < 2.5~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $2.5 < q^2 < 4.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $4.0 <q^2< 6.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $6.0 < q^2 < 8.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $11.0 <q^2< 12.5 ~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $15.0 < q^2 < 17.0 ~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $17.0 <q^2< 19.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $1.1 <q^2< 6.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $15.0 <q^2< 19.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $0.1 < q^2 < 0.98~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $1.1 < q^2 < 2.5~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $2.5 < q^2 < 4.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $4.0 <q^2< 6.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $6.0 < q^2 < 8.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $11.0 <q^2< 12.5 ~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $15.0 <q^2< 17.0 ~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $17.0 <q^2< 19.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $1.1 <q^2< 6.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $15.0 <q^2< 19.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $0.1 < q^2 < 0.98~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $1.1 < q^2 < 2.5~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $2.5 < q^2 < 4.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $4.0 <q^2< 6.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $6.0 < q^2 < 8.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $11.0 <q^2< 12.5 ~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $15.0 <q^2< 17.0 ~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $17.0 <q^2< 19.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $1.1 <q^2< 6.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Likelihood correlation matrix $15.0 <q^2< 19.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $0.10 < q^2 < 0.98~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $1.1 < q^2 < 2.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $2.0 < q^2 < 3.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $3.0 < q^2 < 4.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $4.0 < q^2 < 5.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $5.0 < q^2 < 6.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $6.0 < q^2 < 7.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $7.0 < q^2 < 8.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $11.00 <q^2 < 11.75~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $11.75 <q^2 < 12.50~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $15.0 <q^2 < 16.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $16.0 <q^2 < 17.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $17.0 <q^2 < 18.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $18.0 <q^2 < 19.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $15.0 <q^2 < 19.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $0.10 < q^2 < 0.98~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $1.1 < q^2 < 2.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $2.0 < q^2 < 3.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $3.0 < q^2 < 4.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $4.0 < q^2 < 5.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $5.0 < q^2 < 6.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $6.0 < q^2 < 7.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $7.0 < q^2 < 8.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $11.00 <q^2 < 11.75~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $11.75 <q^2 < 12.50~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $15.0 <q^2 < 16.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $16.0 <q^2 < 17.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $17.0 <q^2 < 18.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $18.0 <q^2 < 19.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $15.0 <q^2 < 19.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $0.1 <q^2 < 0.98~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $1.1 <q^2 < 2.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $2.0 <q^2 < 3.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $3.0 <q^2 < 4.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $4.0 <q^2 < 5.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $5.0 <q^2 < 6.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $6.0 <q^2 < 7.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $7.0 <q^2 < 8.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $11.0 <q^2 < 11.75~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $11.75 <q^2 < 12.5~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $15.0 <q^2 < 16.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $16.0 <q^2 < 17.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $17.0 < q^2 < 18.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $18.0 < q^2 < 19.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Bootstrap correlation matrix $15.0 < q^2 < 19.0~{\rm GeV}^2/c^4$.

Inclusive cross-section for $Z$ boson production in bins of PHI*. The uncertainties are statistical, systematic, beam and luminosity.

Inclusive cross-section for $Z$ boson production in bins of muon pseudorapidity. The uncertainties are statistical, systematic, beam and luminosity.

$W^{\pm}$ to $Z$ boson cross-section ratio in bins of muon pseudorapidity. The uncertainties are statistical, systematic, beam and luminosity.

Ratio of $W^+$ to $W^-$ cross-section in bins of muon pseudorapidity. The uncertainties are statistical, systematic and beam.

Lepton charge asymmetry in bins of muon pseudorapidity. The uncertainties are statistical, systematic and beam.

Ratios of $W^{\pm}$ to $Z$ boson cross-section ratios at differnent centre-of-mass energy (8 TeV to 7 TeV) in bins of muon pseudorapidity. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic.

Inclusive cross-section for $Z$ boson production in bins of muon pseudorapidity at centre-of-mass energy of 7 TeV. The uncertainties are statistical, systematic, beam and luminosity.

$W^{\pm}$ to $Z$ boson cross-section ratio in bins of muon pseudorapidity at centre-of-mass energy of 7 TeV. The uncertainties are statistical, systematic, beam and luminosity.

Correlation coefficients of differential cross-section measurements as a function of lepton $\eta$. The beam energy and luminosity uncertainties, which are fully correlated between cross-section measurements, are excluded. This table lists bin-to-bin correlations for $W^{+}$.

Correlation coefficients of differential cross-section measurements as a function of lepton $\eta$. The beam energy and luminosity uncertainties, which are fully correlated between cross-section measurements, are excluded. This table lists bin-to-bin correlations for $W^{-}$.

Correlation coefficients of differential cross-section measurements as a function of lepton $\eta$. The beam energy and luminosity uncertainties, which are fully correlated between cross-section measurements, are excluded. This table lists differential cross-section correlations between $W^{-}$ and $W^{+}$ bins.

Correlation coefficients of differential cross-section measurements as a function of $y_{Z}$. The beam energy and luminosity uncertainties, which are fully correlated between cross-section measurements, are excluded.

Correlation coefficients of differential cross-section measurements as a function of transverse momentum. The beam energy and luminosity uncertainties, which are fully correlated between cross-section measurements, are excluded.

Correlation coefficients of differential cross-section measurements as a function of $\phi^{*}$. The beam energy and luminosity uncertainties, which are fully correlated between cross-section measurements, are excluded.

Correlation coefficients between differential cross-section measurements as a function $y_{Z}$ and $W^{+}$ boson muon $\eta$. The beam energy and luminosity uncertainties, which are fully correlated between cross-section measurements, are excluded.

Correlation coefficients between differential cross-section measurements as a function $y_{Z}$ and $W^{-}$ boson muon $\eta$. The beam energy and luminosity uncertainties, which are fully correlated between cross-section measurements, are excluded.

Correlation coefficients of differential cross-section measurements as a function of $\eta^{\mu^{+}}$ of the Z boson. The beam energy and luminosity uncertainties, which are fully correlated between cross-section measurements, are excluded.

Correlation coefficients of differential cross-section measurements as a function of $\eta^{\mu^{-}}$ of the Z boson. The beam energy and luminosity uncertainties, which are fully correlated between cross-section measurements, are excluded.

Correlation coefficients of differential cross-section measurements as a function of $\eta^{\mu^{+}}$. The beam energy and luminosity uncertainties, which are fully correlated between cross-section measurements, are excluded.

Correlation coefficients of differential cross-section measurements as a function of $\eta^{\mu^{-}}$. The beam energy and luminosity uncertainties, which are fully correlated between cross-section measurements, are excluded.

Target asymmetry T for c.m. cos(Theta_pi0)= 0.819

Target asymmetry T for c.m. cos(Theta_pi0)= 0.707

Target asymmetry T for c.m. cos(Theta_pi0)= 0.574

Target asymmetry T for c.m. cos(Theta_pi0)= 0.423

Target asymmetry T for c.m. cos(Theta_pi0)= 0.259

Target asymmetry T for c.m. cos(Theta_pi0)= 0.087

Target asymmetry T for c.m. cos(Theta_pi0)= -0.087

Target asymmetry T for c.m. cos(Theta_pi0)= -0.259

Target asymmetry T for c.m. cos(Theta_pi0)= -0.423

Target asymmetry T for c.m. cos(Theta_pi0)= -0.574

Target asymmetry T for c.m. cos(Theta_pi0)= -0.707

Target asymmetry T for c.m. cos(Theta_pi0)= -0.819

Target asymmetry T for c.m. cos(Theta_pi0)= -0.906

Target asymmetry T for c.m. cos(Theta_pi0)= -0.966

Target asymmetry T for c.m. cos(Theta_pi0)= -0.996

Products of $\overline{B}^0$ production cross-sections and $\mathcal{B}(\overline{B}^0 \rightarrow J\psi \overline{K}^{*0})$ in bins of $p_\rm{T}$ and $y$ in the 2012 data sample.

Asymmetries $a_{\rm p+d}$ $(\%)$ of $\Lambda_b^0$ and $\overline{\Lambda}_b^0$ in bins of $p_\rm{T}$ for the 2011 and 2012 samples.

Asymmetries $a_{\rm p+d}$ $(\%)$ of $\Lambda_b^0$ and $\overline{\Lambda}_b^0$ in bins of $y$ for the 2011 and 2012 samples.