The ratios between the hydrodynamic probes and their Taylor expansions. The ratios are plotted as functions of centrality in PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=5.02~\textrm{Te}\textrm{V}$. The measurement is performed with charged particles within the acceptance region.

The ratios between the hydrodynamic probes and their Taylor expansions. The ratios are plotted as functions of centrality in PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=5.02~\textrm{Te}\textrm{V}$. The measurement is performed with charged particles within the acceptance region.

The magnitudes of the measured skewness $\gamma_1^\textrm{exp}$ and "corrected" skewness $\gamma_{1,\textrm{corr}}^\textrm{exp}$ as functions of centrality in PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=5.02~\textrm{Te}\textrm{V}$. The measurement is performed with charged particles within the acceptance region.

The magnitudes of the measured kurtosis $\gamma_2^\textrm{exp}$ and "corrected" kurtosis $\gamma_{2,\textrm{corr}}^\textrm{exp}$ as functions of centrality in PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=5.02~\textrm{Te}\textrm{V}$. The measurement is performed with charged particles within the acceptance region.

The magnitudes of the measured superskewness $\gamma_3^\textrm{exp}$ and "corrected" superskewness $\gamma_{3,\textrm{corr}}^\textrm{exp}$ as functions of centrality in PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=5.02~\textrm{Te}\textrm{V}$. The measurement is performed with charged particles within the acceptance region.

$\Delta\phi$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 0-10% centrality

$\Delta\phi$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 30-40% centrality

1D $\Delta\eta$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 70-80% centrality

$\Delta\eta$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 0-40 $N_{trk}$

$\Delta\eta$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 120-150 $N_{trk}$

$\Delta\eta$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 270-300 $N_{trk}$

$\Delta\phi$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 0-40 $N_{trk}$

$\Delta\phi$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 120-150 $N_{trk}$

$\Delta\phi$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 270-300 $N_{trk}$

The width of balance function in $<|\Delta\eta|>$ in low $p_{T}$ for PbPb collisions

Balance function width in low $p_{T}$ PbPb relative $<|\Delta\eta|>/<|\Delta\eta|>_{N_{ch}<65}$

The width of balance function in $<|\Delta\eta|>$ in low $p_{T}$ for pPb collisions

Balance function width in low $p_{T}$ in pPb relative $<|\Delta\eta|>/<|\Delta\eta|>_{N_{ch}<24}$

The width of the balance function in $<|\Delta\phi|>$ in low $p_{T}$ for PbPb collisions

Balance function width in low $p_{T}$ in PbPb for relative $<|\Delta\phi|>/<|\Delta\phi|>_{N_{ch}<65}$

The width of the balance function in $<|\Delta\phi|>$ in low $p_{T}$ for pPb collisions

Balance function width in low $p_{T}$ in pPb for relative $|\Delta\phi|/<|\Delta\phi|>_{N_{ch}<24}$

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 0-10% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 30-40% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 70-80% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 0-10% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 30-40% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 70-80% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in pPb for 0-40 $N_{trk}$

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in pPb for 120-150 $N_{trk}$

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in pPb for 270-300 $N_{trk}$

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in pPb for $N_{trk}$ 0-40

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in pPb for $N_{trk}$ 120-150

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in pPb for $N_{trk}$ 270-300

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 0-10% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 30-40% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 70-80% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 0-10% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 30-40% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 70-80% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in high $p_{T}$ in pPb for $N_{trk}$ 0-40

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in high $p_{T}$ in pPb for $N_{trk}$ 120-150

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in high $p_{T}$ in pPb for $N_{trk}$ 270-300

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for $N_{trk}$ 0-40

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for $N_{trk}$ 120-150

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for $N_{trk}$ 270-300

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \eta$ with $N_{ch}$ for low $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \eta$ with $N_{ch}$ for intermediate $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \eta$ with $N_{ch}$ for high $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \phi$ with $p_{T}$ for low $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \phi$ with $N_{ch}$ for intermediate $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \phi$ with $N_{ch}$ for high $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \eta$ with $N_{ch}$ for low $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \eta$ with $N_{ch}$ for intermediate $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \phi$ with $N_{ch}$ for high $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \phi$ with $N_{ch}$ for low $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \phi$ with $N_{ch}$ for intermediate $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \phi$ with $N_{ch}$ for high $p_{T}$

The Levy scale parameter $R$ versus the transverse mass $m_{\mathrm{T}}$ in different centrality classes for negatively and positively charged hadron pairs.

The $1/R^2$ distribution vs. transverse mass $m_{\mathrm{T}}$ in different centrality classes for negatively and positively charged hadron pairs.

The linear-fit parameter $A$ versus $\langle N_{\text{part}}\rangle$ for positively and negatively charged hadron pairs. The bin range on $\langle N_{\text{part}}\rangle$ represents the 68% confidence interval associated to its uncertainty.

The linear-fit parameter $B$ versus $\langle N_{\text{part}}\rangle$ for positively and negatively charged hadron pairs. The bin range on $\langle N_{\text{part}}\rangle$ represents the 68% confidence interval associated to its uncertainty.

The Levy scale parameter $R$ versus $\langle N_{\text{part}}\rangle^{1/3}$ in different $m_{\mathrm{T}}$ classes for negatively and positively charged hadron pairs. The bin range on $\langle N_{\text{part}}\rangle^{1/3}$ represents the 68% confidence interval associated to its uncertainty.

The Levy stability index $\alpha$ versus the transverse mass $m_{\mathrm{T}}$ in different centrality classes for negatively and positively charged hadron pairs.

The average Levy stability index $\langle \alpha \rangle$ versus $\langle N_{\text{part}}\rangle$ for both positively and negatively charged hadron pairs. The bin range on $\langle N_{\text{part}}\rangle$ represents the 68% confidence interval associated to its uncertainty.

The correlation strength $\lambda$ versus the transverse mass $m_{\mathrm{T}}$ in different centrality classes for negatively and positively charged hadron pairs.

The correlation strength (re-scaled with the square of the pion fraction) $\lambda ^*$ versus the transverse mass $m_{\mathrm{T}}$ in different centrality classes for positively and negatively charged hadron pairs.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron cross-section in pp collisions. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron cross-section in pp collisions. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{SP\}$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{4\}$ for $K_S^0$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{6\}$ for $K_S^0$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{8\}$ for $K_S^0$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{SP\}$ for $K_S^0$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{4\}$ for $\Lambda$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{6\}$ for $\Lambda$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{8\}$ for $\Lambda$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{SP\}$ for $\Lambda$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{4\}$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{6\}$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{8\}$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{p-SP\}$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{Pb-SP\}$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{4\}$ for $K_S^0$ as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{6\}$ for $K_S^0$ as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{p-SP\}$ for $K_S^0$ as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{Pb-SP\}$ for $K_S^0$ as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{4\}$ for $\Lambda$ as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{6\}$ for $\Lambda$ as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{p-SP\}$ for $\Lambda$ as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{Pb-SP\}$ for $\Lambda$ as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{4,veto\}$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{6,veto\}$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The ratio $v_2\{4,veto\}/v_2\{4\}$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The ratio $v_2\{6,veto\}/v_2\{6\}$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{4,Sub\}$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{4,Sub\}$ for $K_S^0$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{4,Sub\}$ for $\Lambda$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{4,Sub\}$ for $K_S^0$ as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{4,Sub\}$ for $\Lambda$ as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The elliptic flow $v_2\{4,Sub\}$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The ratio $v_2\{4,Sub\}/v_2\{4\}$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The ratio $v_2\{4,Sub\}/v_2\{4\}$ for $K_S^0$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The ratio $v_2\{4,Sub\}/v_2\{4\}$ for $\Lambda$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The ratio $v_2\{4,Sub\}/v_2\{4\}$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The ratio $v_2\{4,Sub\}/v_2\{4\}$ for $K_S^0$ as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The ratio $v_2\{4,Sub\}/v_2\{4\}$ for $\Lambda$ as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The flow fluctuation $\sigma/\langle v_{2} \rangle$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The flow fluctuation $\sigma/\langle v_2 \rangle$ for $K_S^0$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The flow fluctuation $\sigma/\langle v_2 \rangle$ for $\Lambda$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The flow fluctuation $\sigma/\langle v_2 \rangle$ for $K_S^0$ as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The flow fluctuation $\sigma/\langle v_2 \rangle$ for $\Lambda$ as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The flow fluctuation $\sigma/\langle v_2 \rangle$ using $v_2\{4\}$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The flow fluctuation $\sigma/\langle v_2 \rangle$ using $v_2\{6\}$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The flow fluctuation $\sigma/\langle v_2 \rangle$ using $v_2\{4,veto\}$ for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in pPb collision at 8.16 TeV.

The $v_2\{6\}/v_2\{4\}$ ratio for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The $v_2\{6\}/v_2\{4\}$ ratio for $K_S^0$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The $v_2\{6\}/v_2\{4\}$ ratio for $\Lambda$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The $v_2\{8\}/v_2\{4\}$ ratio for charged hadron as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The $v_2\{8\}/v_2\{4\}$ ratio for $K_S^0$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The $v_2\{8\}/v_2\{4\}$ ratio for $\Lambda$ as a function of $p_T$ in PbPb collision at 5.02 TeV.

The standard deviation of the jet charge distributions with different track $p_{T}$ thresholds and $\kappa$ value pf 0.7 for pp collisions and in the various event centrality bins for PbPb collisions compared with the PYTHIA6 prediction.

Fitting results for the extraction of gluon-like jet fractions in pp and PbPb data shown for different track $p_{T}$ threshold values and $p_{T}$-weighting factor $\kappa$ values of 0.5.

Fitting results for the extraction of gluon-like jet fractions in pp and PbPb data shown for $p_{T}$-weighting factor $\kappa$ values of 0.3, 0.5, and 0.7 and minimum track $p_{T}$ of 1 GeV.

Fitting results for the extraction of gluon-like jet fractions in pp and PbPb data shown for $p_{T}$-weighting factor $\kappa$ values of 0.3, 0.5, and 0.7 and minimum track $p_{T}$ of 2 GeV.

Unfolded jet charge measurements for the $p_{T}$-weighting factor $\kappa = 0.5$ and a minimum track $p_{T}$ of 2 GeV for inclusive jets in pp and PbPb data. The PbPb results are shown for different centrality regions.

Unfolded jet charge measurements for the $p_{T}$-weighting factor $\kappa = 0.5$ and a minimum track $p_{T}$ of 4 GeV for inclusive jets in pp and PbPb data. The PbPb results are shown for different centrality regions.

Unfolded jet charge measurements for the $p_{T}$-weighting factor $\kappa = 0.5$ and a minimum track $p_{T}$ of 5 GeV for inclusive jets in pp and PbPb data. The PbPb results are shown for different centrality regions.

Unfolded jet charge measurements for a minimum track $p_{T}$ threshold of 1 GeV and $p_{T}$-weighting factor $\kappa = 0.3$ for inclusive jets in pp and PbPb data. The PbPb results are shown for different centrality regions.

Unfolded jet charge measurements for a minimum track $p_{T}$ threshold of 1 GeV and $p_{T}$-weighting factor $\kappa = 0.7$ for inclusive jets in pp and PbPb data. The PbPb results are shown for different centrality regions.

Unfolded jet charge measurements for a minimum track $p_{T}$ threshold of 2 GeV and $p_{T}$-weighting factor $\kappa = 0.3$ for inclusive jets in pp and PbPb data. The PbPb results are shown for different centrality regions.

Unfolded jet charge measurements for a minimum track $p_{T}$ threshold of 2 GeV and $p_{T}$-weighting factor $\kappa = 0.7$ for inclusive jets in pp and PbPb data. The PbPb results are shown for different centrality regions.

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 1.0 $<p_{T}<$ 2.0 $GeV/c$ and $N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 35 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 7 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 2.0 $<p_{T}<$ 3.0 $GeV/c$ and $N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 35 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 13 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 2.0 $<p_{T}<$ 3.0 $GeV/c$ and $N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 35 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 7 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 3.0 $<p_{T}<$ 4.0 $GeV/c$ and $N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 35 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 13 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 3.0 $<p_{T}<$ 4.0 $GeV/c$ and $N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 35 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 7 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 0.1 $<p_{T}<$ 1.0 $GeV/c$ and 35 $<N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 80 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 13 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 0.1 $<p_{T}<$ 1.0 $GeV/c$ and 35 $<N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 90 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 7 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 1.0 $<p_{T}<$ 2.0 $GeV/c$ and 35 $<N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 80 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 13 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 1.0 $<p_{T}<$ 2.0 $GeV/c$ and 35 $<N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 90 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 7 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 2.0 $<p_{T}<$ 3.0 $GeV/c$ and 35 $<N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 80 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 13 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 2.0 $<p_{T}<$ 3.0 $GeV/c$ and 35 $<N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 90 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 7 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 3.0 $<p_{T}<$ 4.0 $GeV/c$ and 35 $<N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 80 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 13 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 3.0 $<p_{T}<$ 4.0 $GeV/c$ and 35 $<N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 90 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 7 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 0.1 $<p_{T}<$ 1.0 $GeV/c$ and 80 $<N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 105 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 13 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 0.1 $<p_{T}<$ 1.0 $GeV/c$ and 90 $<N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 105 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 7 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 1.0 $<p_{T}<$ 2.0 $GeV/c$ and 80 $<N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 105 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 13 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 1.0 $<p_{T}<$ 2.0 $GeV/c$ and 90 $<N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 105 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 7 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 2.0 $<p_{T}<$ 3.0 $GeV/c$ and 80 $<N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 105 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 13 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 2.0 $<p_{T}<$ 3.0 $GeV/c$ and 90 $<N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 105 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 7 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 3.0 $<p_{T}<$ 4.0 $GeV/c$ and 80 $<N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 105 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 13 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 3.0 $<p_{T}<$ 4.0 $GeV/c$ and 90 $<N_{offline}^{trk}<$ 105 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 7 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 0.1 $<p_{T}<$ 1.0 $GeV/c$ and $N_{offline}^{trk}>$ 105 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 13 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 0.1 $<p_{T}<$ 1.0 $GeV/c$ and $N_{offline}^{trk}>$ 110 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 7 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 1.0 $<p_{T}<$ 2.0 $GeV/c$ and $N_{offline}^{trk}>$ 105 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 13 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 1.0 $<p_{T}<$ 2.0 $GeV/c$ and $N_{offline}^{trk}>$ 110 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 7 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 2.0 $<p_{T}<$ 3.0 $GeV/c$ and $N_{offline}^{trk}>$ 105 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 13 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 2.0 $<p_{T}<$ 3.0 $GeV/c$ and $N_{offline}^{trk}>$ 110 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 7 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 3.0 $<p_{T}<$ 4.0 $GeV/c$ and $N_{offline}^{trk}>$ 105 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 13 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Correlated yield obtained with the ZYAM procedure as a function of $|\Delta\Phi|$, averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 in for 3.0 $<p_{T}<$ 4.0 $GeV/c$ and $N_{offline}^{trk}>$ 110 bins for pp data at $\sqrt =$ 7 $TeV$. The $p_{T}$ selection applies to both particles in the pair. Only statistical uncertainties are given. The subtracted ZYAM constant is given ($C_{ZYAM}$).

Associated yield for the near side of the correlation function averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 and integrated over the region $|\Delta\Phi| < \Delta\Phi_{ZYAM}$ for pp data at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 $TeV$. The associated yield as a function of $p_{T}$ for events with $N^{offline}_{trk} \geq$ 105. The $p_{T}$ value for each $p_{T}$ bin is the average $p_{T}$ value.

Associated yield for the near side of the correlation function averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 for pp data at $\sqrt{s} =$ 7 $TeV$. The associated yield as a function of $p_{T}$ for events with $N^{offline}_{trk} \geq$ 110. The $p_{T}$ value for each $p_{T}$ bin is the average $p_{T}$ value.

Associated yield for the near side of the correlation function averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 and integrated over the region $|\Delta\Phi| < \Delta\Phi_{ZYAM}$ for pp data at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 $TeV$. The associated yield as a function of $N_{trk}^{offline}$ for events with 1.0 $< p_{T} <$ 2.0 GeV/c. The $N_{trk}^{offline}$ value for each $N_{trk}^{offline}$ bin is the average $N_{trk}^{offline}$ value.

Associated yield for the near side of the correlation function averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 for pp data at $\sqrt{s} =$ 7 $TeV$. The associated yield as a function of $N_{trk}^{offline}$ for events with 1.0 $< p_{T} <$ 2.0 GeV/c. The $N_{trk}^{offline}$ value for each $N_{trk}^{offline}$ bin is the average $N_{trk}^{offline}$ value.

Associated yield for the near side of the correlation function averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 pPb data at $\sqrt{s} =$ 5.02 $TeV$. The associated yield as a function of $N_{trk}^{offline}$ for events with 1.0 $< p_{T} <$ 2.0 GeV/c. The $N_{trk}^{offline}$ value for each $N_{trk}^{offline}$ bin is the average $N_{trk}^{offline}$ value.

Associated yield for the near side of the correlation function averaged over 2 $<|\Delta\eta|<$ 4 PbPb data at $\sqrt{s} =$ 2.76 $TeV$. The associated yield as a function of $N_{trk}^{offline}$ for events with 1.0 $< p_{T} <$ 2.0 GeV/c. The $N_{trk}^{offline}$ value for each $N_{trk}^{offline}$ bin is the average $N_{trk}^{offline}$ value.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 0.15 GeV, for centrality 30-50%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 0.15 GeV, for centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 5 GeV, for centrality 0-10%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 5 GeV, for centrality 10-30%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 5 GeV, for centrality 30-50%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 5 GeV, for centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 10 GeV, for centrality 0-10%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 10 GeV, for centrality 10-30%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 10 GeV, for centrality 30-50%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 10 GeV, for centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Ratio of charged jet spectra with leading track selection of pT > 0.15 GeV to pT > 5 GeV using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3, for centrality 0-10%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Ratio of charged jet spectra with leading track selection of pT > 0.15 GeV to pT > 5 GeV using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3, for centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Ratio of charged jet spectra with leading track selection of pT > 10 GeV to pT > 5 GeV using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3, for centrality 0-10%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Ratio of charged jet spectra with leading track selection of pT > 10 GeV to pT > 5 GeV using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3, for centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 0.15 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 0-10% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 0.15 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 10-30% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 0.15 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 30-50% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 5 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 0-10% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 5 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 10-30% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 5 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 30-50% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 10 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 0-10% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 10 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 10-30% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 10 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 30-50% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, as a function of the average number of participants in the collision (<Npart>), for charged jets with pT = 60-70 GeV and either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 0.15 GeV. The correspondence between <Npart> and the centrality classes is given in Table 1 of the paper, and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, as a function of the average number of participants in the collision (<Npart>), for charged jets with pT = 60-70 GeV and either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 5 GeV. The correspondence between <Npart> and the centrality classes is given in Table 1 of the paper, and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, as a function of the average number of participants in the collision (<Npart>), for charged jets with pT = 60-70 GeV and either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 10 GeV. The correspondence between <Npart> and the centrality classes is given in Table 1 of the paper, and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Ratio of charged jet pT-spectra with radius parameter R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 5 GeV, for two centrality classes 0-10% and 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the event-plane method, V2(EP) v PT for the centrality range 15-20%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the event-plane method, V2(EP) v PT for the centrality range 20-25%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the event-plane method, V2(EP) v PT for the centrality range 25-30%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the event-plane method, V2(EP) v PT for the centrality range 30-35%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the event-plane method, V2(EP) v PT for the centrality range 35-40%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the event-plane method, V2(EP) v PT for the centrality range 40-50%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the event-plane method, V2(EP) v PT for the centrality range 50-60%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the event-plane method, V2(EP) v PT for the centrality range 60-70%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the event-plane method, V2(EP) v PT for the centrality range 70-80%.

Measurements of the second-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C2) v PT for the centrality range 0-5%.

Measurements of the second-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C2) v PT for the centrality range 5-10%.

Measurements of the second-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C2) v PT for the centrality range 10-15%.

Measurements of the second-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C2) v PT for the centrality range 15-20%.

Measurements of the second-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C2) v PT for the centrality range 20-25%.

Measurements of the second-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C2) v PT for the centrality range 25-30%.

Measurements of the second-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C2) v PT for the centrality range 30-35%.

Measurements of the second-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C2) v PT for the centrality range 35-40%.

Measurements of the second-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C2) v PT for the centrality range 40-50%.

Measurements of the second-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C2) v PT for the centrality range 50-60%.

Measurements of the second-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C2) v PT for the centrality range 60-70%.

Measurements of the second-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C2) v PT for the centrality range 70-80%.

Measurements of the fourth-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C4) v PT for the centrality range 5-10%.

Measurements of the fourth-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C4) v PT for the centrality range 10-15%.

Measurements of the fourth-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C4) v PT for the centrality range 15-20%.

Measurements of the fourth-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C4) v PT for the centrality range 20-25%.

Measurements of the fourth-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C4) v PT for the centrality range 25-30%.

Measurements of the fourth-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C4) v PT for the centrality range 30-35%.

Measurements of the fourth-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C4) v PT for the centrality range 35-40%.

Measurements of the fourth-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C4) v PT for the centrality range 40-50%.

Measurements of the fourth-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C4) v PT for the centrality range 50-60%.

Measurements of the fourth-order elliptic anisotropy parameter using the cumulant method, V2(C4) v PT for the centrality range 60-70%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the Lee-Yang zeros method, V2(LYZ) v PT for the centrality range 5-10%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the Lee-Yang zeros method, V2(LYZ) v PT for the centrality range 10-15%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the Lee-Yang zeros method, V2(LYZ) v PT for the centrality range 15-20%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the Lee-Yang zeros method, V2(LYZ) v PT for the centrality range 20-25%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the Lee-Yang zeros method, V2(LYZ) v PT for the centrality range 25-30%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the Lee-Yang zeros method, V2(LYZ) v PT for the centrality range 30-35%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the Lee-Yang zeros method, V2(LYZ) v PT for the centrality range 35-40%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the Lee-Yang zeros method, V2(LYZ) v PT for the centrality range 40-50%.

Integrtated V2 as a function of centrality.

Pseudorapidity dependence of V2 for centrality 0-5%.

Pseudorapidity dependence of V2 for centrality 5-10%.

Pseudorapidity dependence of V2 for centrality 10-15%.

Pseudorapidity dependence of V2 for centrality 15-20%.

Pseudorapidity dependence of V2 for centrality 20-25%.

Pseudorapidity dependence of V2 for centrality 25-30%.

Pseudorapidity dependence of V2 for centrality 30-35%.

Pseudorapidity dependence of V2 for centrality 35-40%.

Pseudorapidity dependence of V2 for centrality 40-50%.

Pseudorapidity dependence of V2 for centrality 50-60%.

Pseudorapidity dependence of V2 for centrality 60-70%.

Pseudorapidity dependence of V2 for centrality 70-80%.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 0-5% and |eta| ranges 0.0-0.4, 0.4-0.8 and 0.8-1.2.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 0-5% and |eta| ranges 1.2-1.6, 1.6-2.0 and 2.0-2.4.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 5-10% and |eta| ranges 0.0-0.4, 0.4-0.8 and 0.8-1.2.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 5-10% and |eta| ranges 1.2-1.6, 1.6-2.0 and 2.0-2.4.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 10-15% and |eta| ranges 0.0-0.4, 0.4-0.8 and 0.8-1.2.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 10-15% and |eta| ranges 1.2-1.6, 1.6-2.0 and 2.0-2.4.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 15-20% and |eta| ranges 0.0-0.4, 0.4-0.8 and 0.8-1.2.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 15-20% and |eta| ranges 1.2-1.6, 1.6-2.0 and 2.0-2.4.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 20-25% and |eta| ranges 0.0-0.4, 0.4-0.8 and 0.8-1.2.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 20-25% and |eta| ranges 1.2-1.6, 1.6-2.0 and 2.0-2.4.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 25-30% and |eta| ranges 0.0-0.4, 0.4-0.8 and 0.8-1.2.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 25-30% and |eta| ranges 1.2-1.6, 1.6-2.0 and 2.0-2.4.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 30-35% and |eta| ranges 0.0-0.4, 0.4-0.8 and 0.8-1.2.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 30-35% and |eta| ranges 1.2-1.6, 1.6-2.0 and 2.0-2.4.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 35-40% and |eta| ranges 0.0-0.4, 0.4-0.8 and 0.8-1.2.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 35-40% and |eta| ranges 1.2-1.6, 1.6-2.0 and 2.0-2.4.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 40-50% and |eta| ranges 0.0-0.4, 0.4-0.8 and 0.8-1.2.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 40-50% and |eta| ranges 1.2-1.6, 1.6-2.0 and 2.0-2.4.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 50-60% and |eta| ranges 0.0-0.4, 0.4-0.8 and 0.8-1.2.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 50-60% and |eta| ranges 1.2-1.6, 1.6-2.0 and 2.0-2.4.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 60-70% and |eta| ranges 0.0-0.4, 0.4-0.8 and 0.8-1.2.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 60-70% and |eta| ranges 1.2-1.6, 1.6-2.0 and 2.0-2.4.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 70-80% and |eta| ranges 0.0-0.4, 0.4-0.8 and 0.8-1.2.

PT dependence of V2(EP) for centrality 70-80% and |eta| ranges 1.2-1.6, 1.6-2.0 and 2.0-2.4.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the event-plane method, V2(EP) v PT for the centrality range 0-10%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the event-plane method, V2(EP) v PT for the centrality range 10-20%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the event-plane method, V2(EP) v PT for the centrality range 20-30%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the event-plane method, V2(EP) v PT for the centrality range 30-40%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the event-plane method, V2(EP) v PT for the centrality range 40-50%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the event-plane method, V2(EP) v PT for the centrality range 50-60%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the event-plane method, V2(EP) v PT for the centrality range 60-70%.

Measurements of the elliptic anisotropy parameter using the event-plane method, V2(EP) v PT for the centrality range 70-80%.

Measurements of the second- and fourth-order elliptic anisotropy parameters using the cumulant method v PT for the centrality range 20-60%.

Integrated V2 value extrapolated to PT=0 for the 20-30% centrality range using the event-plane method. Error is combined statistical and systematic.

Integrated V2 values from the event-plane method divided by the participant eccentricity (EPSILON) as a function of the number of participating nucleons (NPART) for the |eta| range <0.8 and PT range 0-3 GeV. Also shown are the correspnding centrality bin ranges.

Eccentricity-scaled V2 as a function of the transverse charged-particle density normalised by the transverse overlap area (S).

The dependence of V2 from the event-plane method on the pseudorapidity, transformed to the rest frame of nuclei moving separately in the positive(negative) directions by adding(subtracting) the beam rapidity,YBEAM. +(-)ve values are from +(-)YBEAM.

The Fourier coefficient V_n,n vs. |Delta(ETARAP)| for individual n values.

The Fourier coefficient V_n vs. |Delta(ETARAP)| from the 2PC anaysis for individual n values from 2 to n.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 0.5 TO 1 GeV and centrality 0 TO 5%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 0.5 TO 1 GeV and centrality 5 TO 10%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 0.5 TO 1 GeV and centrality 10 TO 20%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 0.5 TO 1 GeV and centrality 20 TO 30%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 0.5 TO 1 GeV and centrality 30 TO 40%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 0.5 TO 1 GeV and centrality 40 TO 50%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 0.5 TO 1 GeV and centrality 50 TO 60%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 0.5 TO 1 GeV and centrality 60 TO 70%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 1 TO 2 GeV and centrality 0 TO 5%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 1 TO 2 GeV and centrality 5 TO 10%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 1 TO 2 GeV and centrality 10 TO 20%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 1 TO 2 GeV and centrality 20 TO 30%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 1 TO 2 GeV and centrality 30 TO 40%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 1 TO 2 GeV and centrality 40 TO 50%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 1 TO 2 GeV and centrality 50 TO 60%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 1 TO 2 GeV and centrality 60 TO 70%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 2 TO 3 GeV and centrality 0 TO 5%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 2 TO 3 GeV and centrality 5 TO 10%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 2 TO 3 GeV and centrality 10 TO 20%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 2 TO 3 GeV and centrality 20 TO 30%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 2 TO 3 GeV and centrality 30 TO 40%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 2 TO 3 GeV and centrality 40 TO 50%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 2 TO 3 GeV and centrality 50 TO 60%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 2 TO 3 GeV and centrality 60 TO 70%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 3 TO 4 GeV and centrality 0 TO 5%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 3 TO 4 GeV and centrality 5 TO 10%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 3 TO 4 GeV and centrality 10 TO 20%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 3 TO 4 GeV and centrality 20 TO 30%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 3 TO 4 GeV and centrality 30 TO 40%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 3 TO 4 GeV and centrality 40 TO 50%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 3 TO 4 GeV and centrality 50 TO 60%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 3 TO 4 GeV and centrality 60 TO 70%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 4 TO 8 GeV and centrality 0 TO 5%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 4 TO 8 GeV and centrality 5 TO 10%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 4 TO 8 GeV and centrality 10 TO 20%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 4 TO 8 GeV and centrality 20 TO 30%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 4 TO 8 GeV and centrality 30 TO 40%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 4 TO 8 GeV and centrality 40 TO 50%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 4 TO 8 GeV and centrality 50 TO 60%.

The Fourier coefiiciant V_n vs eta for PT 4 TO 8 GeV and centrality 60 TO 70%.

V_n vs PT for centrality 0 TO 5%.

V_n vs PT for centrality 5 TO 10%.

V_n vs PT for centrality 10 TO 20%.

V_n vs PT for centrality 20 TO 30%.

V_n vs PT for centrality 30 TO 40%.

V_n vs PT for centrality 40 TO 50%.

V_n vs PT for centrality 50 TO 60%.

V_n vs PT for centrality 60 TO 70%.

V_n vs Centrality for PT 1 TO 2 GeV.

V_n vs Centrality for PT 2 TO 3 GeV.

V_n vs Centrality for PT 3 TO 4 GeV.

V_n vs Centrality for PT 4 TO 8 GeV.

V_n vs Centrality for PT 8 TO 12 GeV.

V_n vs Centrality for PT 12 TO 20 GeV.

2PC.V_n vs n for Centrality 0 TO 1 %.

2PC.V_n vs n for Centrality 0 TO 5 %.

2PC.V_n vs n for Centrality 5 TO 10 %.

2PC.V_n vs n for Centrality 0 TO 10 %.

2PC.V_n vs n for Centrality 10 TO 20 %.

2PC.V_n vs n for Centrality 20 TO 30 %.

2PC.V_n vs n for Centrality 30 TO 40 %.

2PC.V_n vs n for Centrality 40 TO 50 %.

2PC.V_n vs n for Centrality 50 TO 60 %.

2PC.V_n vs n for Centrality 60 TO 70 %.

2PC.V_n vs n for Centrality 70 TO 80 %.

V_nn vs n for Centrality 0 TO 1 %.

V_nn vs n for Centrality 0 TO 5 %.

V_nn vs n for Centrality 5 TO 10 %.

V_nn vs n for Centrality 0 TO 10 %.

V_nn vs n for Centrality 10 TO 20 %.

V_nn vs n for Centrality 20 TO 30 %.

V_nn vs n for Centrality 30 TO 40 %.

V_nn vs n for Centrality 40 TO 50 %.

V_nn vs n for Centrality 50 TO 60 %.

V_nn vs n for Centrality 60 TO 70 %.

V_nn vs n for Centrality 70 TO 80 %.

correlation funcitons in various pT bins.

correlation funcitons in various pT bins.

correlation funcitons in various pT bins.

correlation funcitons in various pT bins.

v_{1,1} vs eta for different combinations of pTa and pTb. Figure 18.

v_{1,1} vs eta for different combinations of pTa and pTb. Figure 18.

v_{1,1} vs eta for different combinations of pTa and pTb. Figure 18.

v_{1,1} vs eta for different combinations of pTa and pTb. Figure 18.

v_{1} vs pT for different centrality selections, Figure 21.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_n extracted from 2PC method utilizing the factorization relation.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.

v_ vs pta for various centrality pta combinations.