Higgs fiducial cross section in bins of rapidity for the 4 leptons. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic uncertainties. The numbers in this HEP data entry are not divided by the bin width, and therefore the units are in fb.

Higgs fiducial cross section in bins of Jet Multiplicity The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic uncertainty.

Higgs fiducial cross section in bins of pT of leading jet. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the systematic uncertainty. The numbers in this HEP data entry are not divided by the bin width, and therefore the units are in fb. The 0-jet bin is also included here, which is not shown in the Figure.

Results of likelihood scans for the signal strength modifiers corresponding to the five main SM H boson production mechanisms. The uncertainties, corresponding to one standard deviation confidence intervals, include both statistical and systematic sources. The additional breakdown of the uncertainties into their separate statistical and systematic contributions is also shown.

Result of the 2D likelihood scan for the bosonic and fermionic signal strength modifiers. Contour for the 68% CL region.

Result of the 2D likelihood scan for the bosonic and fermionic signal strength modifiers. Contour for the 95% CL region.

The measured product of cross section times branching fraction for HZZ decay and the SM predictions for the Stage 0 STXS production bins and the inclusive measurement at mH= 125.38 GeV.

The measured product of cross section times branching fraction for HZZ decay and the SM predictions for the merged Stage 1.2 STXS production bins at mH= 125.38 GeV.

Observed correlation matrix between the measured cross sections for the Stage 0 for HZZ decay.

Observed correlation matrix between the measured cross sections for the Stage 1.2 for HZZ decay.

The CP-averaged observable S3 versus q2. The first (second) error bars represent the statistical (total) uncertainties.

The CP-averaged observable S4 versus q2. The first (second) error bars represent the statistical (total) uncertainties.

The CP-averaged observable S5 versus q2. The first (second) error bars represent the statistical (total) uncertainties.

The CP-averaged observable Afb versus q2. The first (second) error bars represent the statistical (total) uncertainties.

The CP-averaged observable S7 versus q2. The first (second) error bars represent the statistical (total) uncertainties.

The CP-averaged observable S8 versus q2. The first (second) error bars represent the statistical (total) uncertainties.

The CP-averaged observable S9 versus q2. The first (second) error bars represent the statistical (total) uncertainties.

The optimised observable Fl versus q2. The first (second) error bars represent the statistical (total) uncertainties.

The optimised observable P1 versus q2. The first (second) error bars represent the statistical (total) uncertainties.

The optimised observable P2 versus q2. The first (second) error bars represent the statistical (total) uncertainties.

The optimised observable P3 versus q2. The first (second) error bars represent the statistical (total) uncertainties.

The optimised observable P4' versus q2. The first (second) error bars represent the statistical (total) uncertainties.

The optimised observable P5' versus q2. The first (second) error bars represent the statistical (total) uncertainties.

The optimised observable P6' versus q2. The first (second) error bars represent the statistical (total) uncertainties.

The optimised observable P8' versus q2. The first (second) error bars represent the statistical (total) uncertainties.

Correlation matrix for the CP-averaged observables FL, AFB and S3–S9 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 0.10 < q2 < 0.98 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the CP-averaged observables FL, AFB and S3–S9 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 1.10 < q2 < 2.50 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the CP-averaged observables FL, AFB and S3–S9 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 2.50 < q2 < 4.00 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the CP-averaged observables FL, AFB and S3–S9 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 4.00 < q2 < 6.00 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the CP-averaged observables FL, AFB and S3–S9 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 6.00 < q2 < 8.00 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the CP-averaged observables FL, AFB and S3–S9 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 11.00 < q2 < 12.50 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the CP-averaged observables FL, AFB and S3–S9 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 15.00 < q2 < 17.00 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the CP-averaged observables FL, AFB and S3–S9 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 17.00 < q2 < 19.00 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the CP-averaged observables FL, AFB and S3–S9 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 1.10 < q2 < 6.00 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the CP-averaged observables FL, AFB and S3–S9 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 15.00 < q2 < 19.00 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the optimised observables FL and P1–P'8 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 0.10 < q2 < 0.98 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the optimised observables FL and P1–P'8 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 1.10 < q2 < 2.50 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the optimised observables FL and P1–P'8 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 2.50 < q2 < 4.00 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the optimised observables FL and P1–P'8 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 4.00 < q2 < 6.00 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the optimised observables FL and P1–P'8 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 6.00 < q2 < 8.00 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the optimised observables FL and P1–P'8 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 11.00 < q2 < 12.50 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the optimised observables FL and P1–P'8 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 15.00 < q2 < 17.00 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the optimised observables FL and P1–P'8 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 17.00 < q2 < 19.00 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the optimised observables FL and P1–P'8 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 1.10 < q2 < 6.00 GeV2/c4

Correlation matrix for the optimised observables FL and P1–P'8 from the maximum-likelihood fit in the interval 15.00 < q2 < 19.00 GeV2/c4

Mean $p_T$ values of the $\Upsilon(1$S$)$, $\Upsilon(2$S$)$, and $\Upsilon(3$S$)$ states with $p_T\,>\,0\,GeV$ and $|y|\,<\,1.2$ as a function of track multiplicity $N_{track}$

Ratio $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ with $|y|\,<\,1.2$ as a function of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in $0<p_T<5\,$GeV range

Ratio $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ with $|y|\,<\,1.2$ as a function of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in $5<p_T<7\,$GeV range

Ratio $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ with $|y|\,<\,1.2$ as a function of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in $7<p_T<9\,$GeV range

Ratio $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ with $|y|\,<\,1.2$ as a function of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in $9<p_T<11\,$GeV range

Ratio $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ with $|y|\,<\,1.2$ as a function of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in $11<p_T<15\,$GeV range

Ratio $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ with $|y|\,<\,1.2$ as a function of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in $15<p_T<20\,$GeV range

Ratio $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ with $|y|\,<\,1.2$ as a function of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in $20<p_T<50\,$GeV range

Ratio $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ with $|y|\,<\,1.2$ as a function of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in $0<p_T<5\,$GeV range

Ratio $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ with $|y|\,<\,1.2$ as a function of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in $5<p_T<7\,$GeV range

Ratio $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ with $|y|\,<\,1.2$ as a function of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in $7<p_T<9\,$GeV range

Ratio $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ with $|y|\,<\,1.2$ as a function of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in $9<p_T<11\,$GeV range

Ratio $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ with $|y|\,<\,1.2$ as a function of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in $11<p_T<15\,$GeV range

Ratio $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ with $|y|\,<\,1.2$ as a function of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in $15<p_T<20\,$GeV range

Ratio $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ with $|y|\,<\,1.2$ as a function of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in $20<p_T<50\,$GeV range

Ratios $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ and $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ as functions of "forward" track multiplicity $N_{track}^{\Delta\phi}$ for $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ states with $p_T\,>\,7\,GeV$ and $|y|\,<\,1.2$. Forward tracks are those with momentum direction in $\Delta\phi\,<\,\pi/3$ w.r.t. the $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ momentum direction.

Ratios $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ and $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ as functions of "transverse" track multiplicity $N_{track}^{\Delta\phi}$ for $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ states with $p_T\,>\,7\,GeV$ and $|y|\,<\,1.2$. Transverse tracks are those with momentum direction in $\pi/3\,<\,\Delta\phi\,<\,2\pi/3$ w.r.t. the $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ momentum direction.

Ratios $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ and $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ as functions of "backward" track multiplicity $N_{track}^{\Delta\phi}$ for $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ states with $p_T\,>\,7\,GeV$ and $|y|\,<\,1.2$. Backward tracks are those with momentum direction in $\Delta\phi\,>\,2\pi/3$ w.r.t. the $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ momentum direction.

Ratios $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ and $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ as functions of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ for $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ states with $p_T\,>\,7\,GeV$ and $|y|\,<\,1.2$ and $N^{\Delta R}_{track}\,=\,0$ charged particles produced in $\Delta R\,<\,0.5$ cone around $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ momentum direction.

Ratios $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ and $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ as functions of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ for $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ states with $p_T\,>\,7\,GeV$ and $|y|\,<\,1.2$ and $N^{\Delta R}_{track}\,=\,1$ charged particles produced in $\Delta R\,<\,0.5$ cone around $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ momentum direction.

Ratios $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ and $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ as functions of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ for $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ states with $p_T\,>\,7\,GeV$ and $|y|\,<\,1.2$ and $N^{\Delta R}_{track}\,=\,2$ charged particles produced in $\Delta R\,<\,0.5$ cone around $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ momentum direction.

Ratios $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ and $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ as functions of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ for $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ states with $p_T\,>\,7\,GeV$ and $|y|\,<\,1.2$ and $N^{\Delta R}_{track}\,>\,2$ charged particles produced in $\Delta R\,<\,0.5$ cone around $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ momentum direction.

Ratios $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ and $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ as functions of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in transverse sphericity bin $0.00\,<\,S_T\,<\,0.55$ for $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ states with $p_T\,>\,7\,GeV$ and $|y|\,<\,1.2$.

Ratios $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ and $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ as functions of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in transverse sphericity bin $0.55\,<\,S_T\,<\,0.70$ for $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ states with $p_T\,>\,7\,GeV$ and $|y|\,<\,1.2$.

Ratios $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ and $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ as functions of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in transverse sphericity bin $0.70\,<\,S_T\,<\,0.85$ for $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ states with $p_T\,>\,7\,GeV$ and $|y|\,<\,1.2$.

Ratios $\Upsilon(2$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ and $\Upsilon(3$S$)\,/\,\Upsilon(1$S$)$ as functions of track multiplicity $N_{track}$ in transverse sphericity bin $0.85\,<\,S_T\,<\,1.00$ for $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ states with $p_T\,>\,7\,GeV$ and $|y|\,<\,1.2$.

Efficiency-corrected multiplicity bins used in the $\Upsilon(n$S$)$ ratio analysis and the corresponding mean number of charged particle tracks.

Fit correlations between the physical parameters of interest, obtained from the fit for solution (b).

Values of the physical parameters extracted in the combination of solution (a) of 13 TeV results with those obtained from 7 TeV and 8 TeV data.

Values of the physical parameters extracted in the combination of solution (b) of 13 TeV results with those obtained from 7 TeV and 8 TeV data.

Correlation matrix of the BLUE combination of the 7 TeV and 8 TeV results and the solution (a) of the 13 TeV result.

Correlation matrix of the BLUE combination of the 7 TeV and 8 TeV results and the solution (b) of the 13 TeV result.

Summary of systematic uncertainties assigned to the physical parameters of interest.

Transverse region charged particle <pT> as a function of the leading jet pT for pT>0.2 GeV/c (open symbols) and pT>0.5 GeV/c (filled symbols). Simulations are also shown as curves. The wide curves are PYTHIA 6 (STAR). The middle width curves are default PYTHIA 6 Perugia 2012 tune. The thin curves are PYTHIA 8 Monash 2013 tune.

Detector-level average charged particle multiplicity densities for TransMax and TransMin as functions of the leading jet pT. Points are measured data. Histograms are calculated values assuming TransMax and TransMin are derived from the same parent distribution.

Transverse charged particle densities at various center-of-mass collision energies. Uncertainties smaller than the marker sizes.

The pseudorapidity ($|\eta|$) distribution for $K^{0}_{S}$ production inside $b$-jets for unfolded data to particle level, normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

The multiplicity ($N_K$) distribution for $K^{0}_{S}$ production inside $b$-jets for unfolded data to particle level, including only visible decays ($K^0_S \rightarrow \pi^+ \pi^-$), normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

The transverse momentum ($p_{T}$) distribution for $K^{0}_{S}$ production inside non $b$-jets for unfolded data to particle level, normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

The energy fraction ($x_{K}$) distribution for $K^{0}_{S}$ production inside non $b$-jets for unfolded data to particle level, normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

The energy distribution for $K^{0}_{S}$ production inside non $b$-jets for unfolded data to particle level, normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

The pseudorapidity ($|\eta|$) distribution for $K^{0}_{S}$ production inside non $b$-jets for unfolded data to particle level, normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

The multiplicity ($N_K$) distribution for $K^{0}_{S}$ production inside non $b$-jets for unfolded data to particle level, including only visible decays ($K^0_S \rightarrow \pi^+ \pi^-$), normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

The transverse momentum ($p_{T}$) distribution for $K^{0}_{S}$ production not associated with jets for unfolded data to particle level, normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), the pile-up, out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

The energy distribution for $K^{0}_{S}$ production not associated with jets for unfolded data to particle level, normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), the pile-up, out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

The pseudorapidity ($|\eta|$) distribution for $K^{0}_{S}$ production not associated with jets for unfolded data to particle level, normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), the pile-up, out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

The multiplicity ($N_K$) distribution for $K^{0}_{S}$ production not associated with jets for unfolded data to particle level, including only visible decays ($K^0_S \rightarrow \pi^+ \pi^-$), normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), the pile-up, out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

The transverse momentum ($p_{T}$) distribution for the total $K^{0}_{S}$ production for unfolded data to particle level, normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), the pile-up, out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

The energy distribution for the total $K^{0}_{S}$ production for unfolded data to particle level, normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), the pile-up, out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

The pseudorapidity ($|\eta|$) distribution for the total $K^{0}_{S}$ production for unfolded data to particle level, normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), the pile-up, out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

The multiplicity ($N_K$) distribution for the total $K^{0}_{S}$ production for unfolded data to particle level, including only visible decays ($K^0_S \rightarrow \pi^+ \pi^-$), normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), the pile-up, out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

The transverse momentum ($p_{T}$) distribution for the total $\Lambda$ production for unfolded data to particle level, normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), the pile-up, out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

The energy distribution for the total $\Lambda$ production for unfolded data to particle level, normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), the pile-up, out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

The pseudorapidity ($|\eta|$) distribution for the total $\Lambda$ production for unfolded data to particle level, normalised to the total number of top pair dileptonic events and scaled to the bin width. The systematic uncertainties are, in order, due to; the MC modelling, the tracking ineficiencies, the jet energy scale (JES), the jet energy resolution (JER), the pile-up, out-of-fiducial events and the unfolding non-closure.

$K^0_S$ and $\Lambda$ unfolded (particle-level) average multiplicities per event ($\langle n_{K,\Lambda}\rangle$), including statistical and systematic uncertainties, for each class and for the total sample.

Spline interpolation of the weight function (depending of $\cos \theta_{P_c}$) applied to $\Lambda_{b}^{0}$ candidates. The weight function is determined as the inverse of the density of $\Lambda_{b}^{0}$ candidates in the narrow pentaquark peak region while the interpolation is done between the bin centers.