Distribution of ETmiss in the signal region for data and for the background predicted from the fit in the CRs. Overflows are included in the final bin.

Limits at 90% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the vector operator D5. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown, assuming coupling values sqrt(g_f g_chi)= 1, 4pi.

Limits at 90% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the axial-vector operator D8. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown, assuming coupling values sqrt(g_f g_chi)= 1, 4pi.

Limits at 90% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the tensor operator D9. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown, assuming coupling values sqrt(g_f g_chi)= 1, 4pi.

Upper limits at 90% C.L. on the WIMP-nucleon scattering cross section as a function of m_chi for spin-independent and spin-dependent interactions, for a coupling strength g = sqrt(g_f g_chi) of unity or the maximum value (4 pi) that keeps the model within its perturbative regime. The truncation procedure is applied for both cases.

Upper limits at 95% C.L. on the WIMP simplified model coupling parameter, sqrt(g_f g_chi), with vector coupling and mediator width Gamma=m_V/3, as a function of WIMP (m_chi) and the mediator particle (m_V) masses.

Observed lower limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the mediator mass mV, for a Z'-like mediator with vector interactions. For a dark-matter mass m_chi of 50 or 400 GeV, results are shown for different values of the mediator total decay width Gamma.

Observed lower limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the mediator mass mV, for a Z'-like mediator with axial-vector interactions. For a dark-matter mass m_chi of 50 or 400 GeV, results are shown for different values of the mediator total decay width Gamma.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the effective mass scale M* in the (k2, k1) parameter plane for the s-channel EFT model inspired by Fermi-LAT gamma-ray line, for m_chi = 130 GeV. The upper part of the plane is excluded.

Lower limits at 95% C.L. on the mass scale M_D in the ADD models of large extra dimensions, for several values of the number of extra dimensions.

Upper limits at 95% C.L. on the cross section for the compressed squark model, as a function of the squark mass, m_squark, and of the difference between the squark mass and the mass of the neutralino, m_squark-m_neutralino, in the compressed region of m_squark-m_neutralino < 50 GeV.

The fiducial efficiency for electrons and taus in different $\eta$ ranges ($\epsilon_{\mathrm{fid}}(\eta)$). For electrons from tau decays, the $\eta$ is that of the electron, not the tau. The uncertainties shown reflect the statistical uncertainties of the simulated samples only. UPDATE (18 MAY 2015): Updated fiducial lepton efficiencies.

Expected and observed event yields for the $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{leptons}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the minimum $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the $b$-tag signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the inclusive $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the high-$E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$, $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the high-$m_{\mathrm{T}}^{W}$, $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the high-$H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{jets}}$, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed event yields for the low-$H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{jets}}$, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ signal regions.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{leptons}}$.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell\mathrm{,min}}$.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on the number of $b$-tagged jets.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ [GeV]. All these signal regions have an additional requirement of $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}\geq 100$ GeV.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$ [GeV]. All these signal regions have an additional requirement of $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{W}\geq 100$ GeV.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$. All these signal regions have an additional requirement of $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{jets}}\geq 150$ GeV.

Expected and observed limits, and corresponding $p$-values and significances (in standard deviations), for signal regions based on cuts on $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$. All these signal regions have an additional requirement of $H_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{jets}} < 150$ GeV.

Reconstructed mass $m_\beta$ in observed data, background estimate and expected signal ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ masses of 400 and 600 GeV) in the chargino search for the lower of the two masses ($m$) in the two-candidate signal region.

Reconstructed mass $m_\beta$ in observed data, background estimate and expected signal ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ masses of 400 and 600 GeV) in the chargino search for the one-loose-candidate signal region.

Reconstructed mass $m_\beta$ in observed data, background estimate and expected signal ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ masses of 400 and 600 GeV) in the chargino search for the one-candidate signal region.

Data and background estimates for the reconstructed mass based on time-of-flight, $m_{\beta}$, for combined candidates in the full-detector 500 GeV gluino R-Hadron search (SR-RH-FD).

Data and background estimates for the reconstructed mass based on specific energy loss, $m_{\beta\gamma}$, for combined candidates in the full-detector 500 GeV gluino R-Hadron search (SR-RH-FD).

Data and background estimates for the reconstructed mass based on time-of-flight, $m_{\beta}$, for the MS-agnostic 500 GeV sbottom and $m_{\beta\gamma}$ R-Hadron search (SR-RH-MA).

Data and background estimates for the reconstructed mass based on specific energy loss, $m_{\beta\gamma}$, for the MS-agnostic 500 GeV stop R-Hadron search (SR-RH-MA).

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the mass of the lightest stau for the GMSB models with $\tan\beta = 10$. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the mass of the lightest stau for the GMSB models with $\tan\beta = 20$. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the mass of the lightest stau for the GMSB models with $\tan\beta = 30$. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the mass of the lightest stau for the GMSB models with $\tan\beta = 40$. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the mass of the lightest stau for the GMSB models with $\tan\beta = 50$. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for directly produced sleptons in the plane $\Delta=m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\tau}_1)$ vs. $m(\tilde{\tau}_1)$.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for directly produced sleptons in the plane $\Delta=m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\tau}_1)$ vs. $m(\tilde{\tau}_1)$.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the $\tilde{\tau}_1$ mass for direct $\tilde{\tau}_1$ production and three values of $\tan\beta$. Expected limits for $\tan\beta=10$ with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties observed limits for three values of $\tan\beta$ and theoretical cross-section prediction for $\tan\beta=10$ with $\pm 1\sigma$ band.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the $\tilde{\chi}_1$ mass for $\tilde{\tau}_1$ sleptons resulting from the decay of directly produced charginos and neutralinos in GMSB. Observed limits, expected limits for $\tan\beta=10$ with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties and theoretical cross-section prediction (dominated by $\tilde{\chi}^0_1 \tilde{\chi}^+_1$ production) with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainty. Depending on the hypothesis and to a small extent on $\tan\beta$, in these models, the chargino mass is 210 to 260 GeV higher than the neutralino mass.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for the LeptoSUSY model.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for the LeptoSUSY model.

Cross-section upper limits for various chargino masses in stable-chargino models. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the LLP mass for the gluino R-Hadron models for the MS-agnostic search. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the LLP mass for the gluino R-Hadron models for the full-detector search. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the LLP mass for the sbottom R-Hadron models for the MS-agnostic search. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the LLP mass for the sbottom R-Hadron models for the full-detector search. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the LLP mass for the stop R-Hadron models for the MS-agnostic search. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Cross-section upper limits as a function of the LLP mass for the stop R-Hadron models for the full-detector search. Expected limit with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainties, observed limit and theoretical cross-section prediction with $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainties.

Summary of systematic uncertainties for the slepton searches (given in percent). Ranges indicate a mass dependence for the given uncertainty (low mass to high mass).

Summary of systematic uncertainties for the chargino and R-Hadron searches (given in percent). Ranges indicate a mass dependence for the given uncertainty (low mass to high mass).

Observed and expected event yields, as well as efficiencies and uncertainties for three MC simulation signal samples, in the two signal regions used in the GMSB slepton search. Cross-section upper limits are stated at 95% CL.

Observed and expected event yields, as well as efficiencies and uncertainties for three MC simulation signal samples, in the three signal regions used in the LeptoSUSY slepton search. Cross-section upper limits are stated at 95% CL.

Observed and expected event yields, as well as efficiencies and uncertainties for three MC simulation signal samples, in the three signal regions used in the chargino search. Cross-section upper limits are stated at 95% CL.

Observed and expected event yields, as well as efficiencies and uncertainties for three MC simulation signal samples, in the R-Hadron searches. Cross-section upper limits are stated at 95% CL.

Mass of the $\tilde{\tau}_1$; cross-section; minimum $p_T$, maximum $\beta$ and minimum $m_{\beta}$ requirements; expected number of signal events (exp.); signal selection efficiency (eff.); background estimate (est.); observed number of events (obs.); expected upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{exp}$); and observed upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{obs}$) for the two signal regions used in the GMSB slepton search.

Mass of the $\tilde{\tau}_1$; cross-section; minimum \pt, maximum $\beta$ and minimum $m_{\beta}$ requirements; expected number of signal events (exp.); signal selection efficiency (eff.); background estimate (est.); observed number of events (obs.); expected upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{exp}$); and observed upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{obs}$) for the two signal regions used in the directly produced $\tilde{\tau}_1$ search.

Masses of the $\tilde{g}$ and $\tilde{q}$; cross-section; minimum \pt, maximum $\beta$ and minimum $m_{\beta}$ requirements; expected number of signal events (exp.); signal selection efficiency (eff.); background estimate (est.); observed number of events (obs.); expected upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{exp}$); and observed upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{obs}$) for the two signal regions used in the LeptoSUSY search.

Slepton search candidate requirements and example candidate selection flow for loose and tight selections.

Mass of the $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}$; cross-section; minimum $p_T$, maximum $\beta$ and minimum $m_{\beta}$ requirements; expected number of signal events (exp.); signal selection efficiency (eff.); background estimate (est.); observed number of events (obs.); expected upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{exp}$); and observed upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{obs}$) for the three signal regions used in the chargino search.

Chargino search candidate requirements and example candidate selection flow for the total production as well as chargino-neutralino (CN) and chargino-pair (CC) production separately.

Mass of the LLP; cross-section; minimum $p$, maximum $\beta\gamma$, maximum $\beta$, minimum $m_{\beta\gamma}$ and minimum $m_{\beta}$ requirements; expected signal (exp.); signal efficiency (eff.); background estimate (est.); observed number of events (obs.); expected upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{exp}$); and observed upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{obs}$) for all R-Hadron models considered in the R-Hadron MS-agnostic (SR-RH-MA) search.

Mass of the LLP; cross-section; minimum $p$, maximum $\beta\gamma$, maximum $\beta$, minimum $m_{\beta\gamma}$ and minimum $m_{\beta}$ requirements; expected signal (exp.); signal efficiency (eff.); background estimate (est.); observed number of events (obs.); expected upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{exp}$); and observed upper cross-section limit ($\sigma^\mathrm{obs}$) for all R-Hadron models considered in the R-Hadron full-detector (SR-RH-FD) search. In cases where two numbers are stated, these reflect the values in the ID+calorimeter and combined selection, respectively, used in this search.

Muon-agnostic search R-Hadron candidate requirements and example candidate selection flow for ID+calorimeter selection.

Full-detector search R-Hadron candidate requirements and example candidate selection flow for combined selection.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $K^{\pm}$ in 0%–50% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_2$ and $v_3$ via the two-particle correlation method for charge-combined $K^{\pm}$ in 0%–50% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_4$ via the two-particle correlation method for charge-combined $K^{\pm}$ in 0%–50% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $p\bar{p}$ in 0%–50% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_2$ and $v_3$ via the two-particle correlation method for charge-combined $p\bar{p}$ in 0%–50% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_4$ via the two-particle correlation method for charge-combined $p\bar{p}$ in 0%–50% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $\pi^{\pm}$ in 0%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $\pi^{\pm}$ in 30%–50% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $K^{\pm}$ in 0%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $K^{\pm}$ in 30%–50% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $p\bar{p}$ in 0%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $p\bar{p}$ in 30%–50% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Freeze-out temperature $T_f$ in the blast-wave model fit to azimuthal anisotropy and invariant yields in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Radially averaged flow rapidity $<\rho>$ in the blast-wave model fit to azimuthal anisotropy and invariant yields in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Radial flow rapidity anisotropy $\rho_n$ in the blast-wave model fit to azimuthal anisotropy $v_2$ and invariant yields in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Radial flow rapidity anisotropy $\rho_n$ in the blast-wave model fit to azimuthal anisotropy $v_3$ and invariant yields in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Radial flow rapidity anisotropy $\rho_n$ in the blast-wave model fit to azimuthal anisotropy $v_4$ and invariant yields in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Radial flow rapidity anisotropy $\rho_n$ in the blast-wave model fit to azimuthal anisotropy $v_4\{\Psi_2\}$ and invariant yields in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Spatial anisotropy $s_n$ in the blast-wave model fit to azimuthal anisotropy $v_2$ and invariant yields in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Spatial anisotropy $s_n$ in the blast-wave model fit to azimuthal anisotropy $v_3$ and invariant yields in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Spatial anisotropy $s_n$ in the blast-wave model fit to azimuthal anisotropy $v_4$ and invariant yields in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Spatial anisotropy $s_n$ in the blast-wave model fit to azimuthal anisotropy $v_4\{\Psi_2\}$ and invariant yields in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $\pi^{\pm}$ in 10%–20% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $\pi^{\pm}$ in 20%–30% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $\pi^{\pm}$ in 30%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $\pi^{\pm}$ in 40%–50% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $\pi^{\pm}$ in 50%–60% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $K^{\pm}$ in 10%–20% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $K^{\pm}$ in 20%–30% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $K^{\pm}$ in 30%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $K^{\pm}$ in 40%–50% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $K^{\pm}$ in 50%–60% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $p\bar{p}$ in 10%–20% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $p\bar{p}$ in 20%–30% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $p\bar{p}$ in 30%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $p\bar{p}$ in 40%–50% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Azimuthal anisotropy $v_n$ via the event-plane method for charge-combined $p\bar{p}$ in 50%–60% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV compared with 200 GeV.

$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV compared with 200 GeV.

$v_2$ for inclusive charged hadrons in Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV compared with 200 GeV.

Comparison of integrated $v_2$ at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 and 200 GeV. Au+Au reaction.

Comparison of integrated $v_2$ at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 and 200 GeV. Au+Au reaction.

Comparison of integrated $v_2$ at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 and 200 GeV. Cu+Cu reaction.

Comparison of integrated $v_2$ at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 and 200 GeV. Cu+Cu reaction.

The comparison of integrated $v_2$ as a function of centrality.

The comparison of the normalized $v_2$/$\epsilon$ vs. centrality.

The comparison of integrated $v_2$ as a function of centrality.

The comparison of the normalized $v_2$/$\epsilon$ vs. centrality.

The comparison of integrated $v_2$ as a function of centrality.

The comparison of the normalized $v_2$/$\epsilon$ vs. centrality.

The comparison of integrated $v_2$ as a function of centrality.

The comparison of the normalized $v_2$/$\epsilon$ vs. centrality.

Comparison of $v_2$ ($p_T$) at 200 GeV for two example systems with different collision size.

Comparison of $v_2$ ($p_T$) at 200 GeV for two example systems with different collision size.

Comparison of $v_2$ ($p_T$) at 200 GeV for two example systems with different collision size.

$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.

$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.

$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.

$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.

$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.

$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.

$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.

$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.

$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.

$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 62.4 and 200 GeV for centralities given.

Comparison of $v_2$ between $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and 200 GeV for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from central Au+Au collisions.

Comparison of $v_2$ between $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and 200 GeV for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from central Au+Au collisions.

Comparison of $v_2$ between $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and 200 GeV for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from central Au+Au collisions.

Comparison of $v_2$ between $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and 200 GeV for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from central Au+Au collisions.

Comparison of $v_2$ between $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and 200 GeV for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from central Au+Au collisions.

Comparison of $v_2$ between $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and 200 GeV for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from central Au+Au collisions.

Comparison of $v_2$ between $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and 200 GeV for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from central Au+Au collisions.

Comparison of the $v_2$ of particles, antiparticles, for a minimum bias sample at 200 GeV and central 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.

Comparison of the $v_2$ of particles, antiparticles, for a minimum bias sample at 200 GeV and central 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.

Comparison of the $v_2$ of particles, antiparticles, for a minimum bias sample at 200 GeV and central 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.

Comparison of the $v_2$ of particles, antiparticles, for a minimum bias sample at 200 GeV and central 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.

Comparison of the $v_2$ of particles, antiparticles, for a minimum bias sample at 200 GeV and central 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.

Comparison of the $v_2$ of particles, antiparticles, for a minimum bias sample at 200 GeV and central 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. $p_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ emitted from Au+Au at 62.4 and 200 GeV and Cu+Cu at 200 GeV collisions.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for the indicated hadrons emitted from central Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for the indicated hadrons emitted from central Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV.

The ratio $v_2$/$n_q$ vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for the indicated hadrons emitted from central Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV.

$v_2$ vs. $p_T$ and $v_2$/($\epsilon * N^{1/3}_{part} * n_q$) vs. ${KE}_T$/$n_q$ for $\pi$/$K$/$p$ in Au+Au at 200 GeV, in Au+Au at 62.4 GeV, and in Cu+Cu at 200 GeV. The values of $v_2$ and $p_T$ in Au+Au at 200 GeV, in Au+Au at 62.4 GeV, and in Cu+Cu at 200 GeV are the same for as figure 14, and the values of $v_2$, $n_q$, and $KE_T$ in Au+Au at 200 GeV, in Au+Au at 62.4 GeV, and in Cu+Cu at 200 GeV are the same for as figure 18.

The LAMBDA reconstruction and selection efficiency EFF as a function of PT and XF.

The LAMBDABAR reconstruction and selection efficiency EFF as a function of PT and XF.

The fiducial, inclusive (SPS+DPS) and DPS-subtracted differential cross-section ratio $\mathrm{d}R_{Z+J/\psi}/\mathrm{d}y$ as a function of $y_{J/\psi}$ for non-prompt $J/\psi$.

The inclusive (SPS+DPS) cross-section ratio $\mathrm{d}R_{Z+J/\psi}^\mathrm{incl}/\mathrm{d}p_\mathrm{T}$ for prompt and non-prompt $J/\psi$. Estimated DPS contributions for each bin, based on the assumptions made in this study, are presented.

The inclusive (SPS+DPS) cross-section ratio $\mathrm{d}R_{Z+J/\psi}^\mathrm{incl}/\mathrm{d}p_\mathrm{T}$ for prompt and non-prompt $J/\psi$. Estimated DPS contributions for each bin, based on the assumptions made in this study, are presented.