Number of expected Standard Model background events including total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature (calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure), number of observed events, and the observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the visible $\tau\nu$ production cross section, $\sigma_{\rm vis} = \sigma(pp \to \tau\nu +X) \cdot \mathcal{A} \cdot \varepsilon$, for $m_{\rm T}$ thresholds ranging from 250 to 1800 GeV. See HepData abstract for details on how to use this data for reinterpretation.

Number of expected Standard Model background events including total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature (calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure), number of observed events, and the observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the visible $\tau\nu$ production cross section, $\sigma_{\rm vis} = \sigma(pp \to \tau\nu +X) \cdot \mathcal{A} \cdot \varepsilon$, for $m_{\rm T}$ thresholds ranging from 250 to 1800 GeV. See HepData abstract for details on how to use this data for reinterpretation.

Number of expected Standard Model background events including total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature (calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure), number of observed events, and the observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the visible $\tau\nu$ production cross section, $\sigma_{\rm vis} = \sigma(pp \to \tau\nu +X) \cdot \mathcal{A} \cdot \varepsilon$, for $m_{\rm T}$ thresholds ranging from 250 to 1800 GeV. See HepData abstract for details on how to use this data for reinterpretation.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on cross section times $\tau\nu$ branching fraction for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on cross section times $\tau\nu$ branching fraction for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on cross section times $\tau\nu$ branching fraction for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$.

Regions of the non-universal G(221) parameter space excluded at 95% CL.

Regions of the non-universal G(221) parameter space excluded at 95% CL.

Regions of the non-universal G(221) parameter space excluded at 95% CL.

Number of expected $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$, $W^{\prime}_{\rm NU}$, Standard Model background and observed events passing the optimal $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each considered signal mass hypothesis. The expectations include the total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature. The yields and uncertainties are calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure.

Number of expected $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$, $W^{\prime}_{\rm NU}$, Standard Model background and observed events passing the optimal $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each considered signal mass hypothesis. The expectations include the total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature. The yields and uncertainties are calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure.

Number of expected $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$, $W^{\prime}_{\rm NU}$, Standard Model background and observed events passing the optimal $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each considered signal mass hypothesis. The expectations include the total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature. The yields and uncertainties are calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure.

Acceptance for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at generator-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. The "selected tau" criteria include the requirement of a $\tau_{\rm had-vis}$ with $p_{\rm T}$ > 50 GeV and $|\eta|$ < 2.4. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.

Acceptance for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at generator-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. The "selected tau" criteria include the requirement of a $\tau_{\rm had-vis}$ with $p_{\rm T}$ > 50 GeV and $|\eta|$ < 2.4. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.

Acceptance for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at generator-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. The "selected tau" criteria include the requirement of a $\tau_{\rm had-vis}$ with $p_{\rm T}$ > 50 GeV and $|\eta|$ < 2.4. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.

Acceptance times efficiency for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at reconstruction-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. "Preselection" includes all criteria prior to those shown. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.

Acceptance times efficiency for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at reconstruction-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. "Preselection" includes all criteria prior to those shown. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.

Acceptance times efficiency for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at reconstruction-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. "Preselection" includes all criteria prior to those shown. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.

Reconstruction efficiency as a function of $m_{\rm T}$ (see HepData abstract for parameterization), defined as the ratio of the number of $\tau\nu$ events remaining after applying the full selection at reconstruction-level to those remaining after applying the fiducial selection at generator-level. The efficiency is largely model independent, with an uncertainty of ~10% due to model choice.

Reconstruction efficiency as a function of $m_{\rm T}$ (see HepData abstract for parameterization), defined as the ratio of the number of $\tau\nu$ events remaining after applying the full selection at reconstruction-level to those remaining after applying the fiducial selection at generator-level. The efficiency is largely model independent, with an uncertainty of ~10% due to model choice.

Reconstruction efficiency as a function of $m_{\rm T}$ (see HepData abstract for parameterization), defined as the ratio of the number of $\tau\nu$ events remaining after applying the full selection at reconstruction-level to those remaining after applying the fiducial selection at generator-level. The efficiency is largely model independent, with an uncertainty of ~10% due to model choice.

Figure 2, right, subfigure b, Transverse mass distribution in the VBF top-quark control regions. For NWA signals, the "0" value means lack of statistics.

Figure 3, left, subfigure a, Transverse mass distribution in the quasi-inclusive ggF WW control regions. The "0" value means lack of statistics.

Figure 3, right, subfigure b, Transverse mass distribution in the quasi-inclusive VBF1Jet WW control regions. The "0" value means lack of statistics.

Figure 4, top left, subfigure a, post-fit distributions of the transverse mass mT in the ggF Signal region. The "0" value means lack of statistics.

Figure 4, top right, subfigure b, post-fit distributions of the transverse mass mT in the VBF1Jet Signal region. The "0" value means lack of statistics.

Figure 4, bottom, subfigure c, post-fit distributions of the transverse mass mT in the VBF2Jet Signal region. The "0" value means lack of statistics.

Figure 5, left, subfigur a, Upper limits at 95% CL on the Higgs boson production cross section times branching fraction in the evmuv channel, for ggF signals with narrow-width lineshape as a function of the signal mass.

Figure 5, right, subfigure b, Upper limits at 95% CL on the Higgs boson production cross section times branching fraction in the evmuv channel, for VBF signals with narrow-width lineshape as a function of the signal mass.

Figure 6, Upper limits at 95% CL on the total ggF and VBF Higgs boson production cross section times branching fraction in the evmuv channel, for a signal at 800 GeV as a function of the ggF cross section divided by the combined ggF and VBF production cross section.

Figure 9, top left, subfigure a, Upper limits at 95% CL on the Higgs boson production cross section times branching fraction for a signal with a width of 15% of the mass for the ggF production.

Figure 9, top right, subfigure b, Upper limits at 95% CL on the Higgs boson production cross section times branching fraction for a signal with a width of 15% of the mass for the VBF production.

Figure 10, left, subfigure a, Upper limits at 95% CL on the resonance production cross section times branching fraction for a GM signal.

Figure 11, left, subfigure a, Upper limits at 95% CL on the resonance production cross section times branching fraction for a HVT qqA signal.

Figure 11, right, subfigure b, Upper limits at 95% CL on the resonance production cross section times branching fraction for a HVT VBF signal.

Figure 12, bottom, subfigure c, Upper limits at 95% CL on the resonance production cross section times branching fraction for an EML spin-2 VBF signal.

Figure 12, top right, subfigure b, Upper limits at 95% CL on the resonance production cross section times branching fraction for a graviton signal with coupling parameter equals 0.5

Figure 12, top left, subfigure a, Upper limits at 95% CL on the resonance production cross section times branching fraction for a graviton signal with coupling parameter equals 1.0

Auxiliary material Figure 2e, Event selection efficiencies in the VBF2J event categories as a function of the signal mass for the ggF or qqA production. The "0" efficiency mass point means there's no such signal sample for the corresponding model.

Auxiliary material Figure 2f, Event selection efficiencies in the VBF2J event categories for different kinds of VBF signals production. The "0" efficiency mass point means there's no such signal sample for the corresponding model.

Auxiliary material Figure 2c, Event selection efficiencies in the VBF1J event categories as a function of the signal mass for the ggF or qqA production. The "0" efficiency mass point means there's no such signal sample for the corresponding model.

Auxiliary material Figure 2d, Event selection efficiencies in the VBF1J event categories for different kinds of VBF signals production. The "0" efficiency mass point means there's no such signal sample for the corresponding model.

Auxiliary material Figure 2a, Event selection efficiencies in the ggF event categories as a function of the signal mass for the ggF or qqA production. The "0" efficiency mass point means there's no such signal sample for the corresponding model.

Auxiliary material Figure 2b, Event selection efficiencies in the ggF event categories for different kinds of VBF signals production. The "0" efficiency mass point means there's no such signal sample for the corresponding model.

Auxiliary material Figure 6a, Upper limits at 95% CL on the Higgs production cross section times branching fraction in the evmuv channel, for a signal with a width of 5% of the mass for the ggF production.

Auxiliary material Figure 6c, Upper limits at 95% CL on the Higgs production cross section times branching fraction in the evmuv channel, for a signal with a width of 10% of the mass for the ggF production.

Auxiliary material Figure 6b, Upper limits at 95% CL on the Higgs production cross section times branching fraction in the evmuv channel, for a signal with a width of 5% of the mass for the VBF production.

Auxiliary material Figure 6d, Upper limits at 95% CL on the Higgs production cross section times branching fraction in the evmuv channel, for a signal with a width of 10% of the mass for the VBF production.

Auxiliary material Figure 7b, Upper limits at 95% CL on the total ggF and VBF Higgs production cross section times branching fraction for a signal at 1.8 TeV as a function of the ggF cross section over the combined ggF and VBF production cross section.

Auxiliary material Figure 7a, Upper limits at 95% CL on the total ggF and VBF Higgs production cross section times branching fraction for a signal at 200 GeV as a function of the ggF cross section over the combined ggF and VBF production cross section.

Observed and predicted mTtot distribution in the b-tag category of the 2tau_h channel. Despite listing this as an exclusive final state (as there must be at least one b-jets), there is no explicit selection on the presence of additional light-flavour jets. Please note that the bin content is divided by the bin width in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table. The last bin includes overflows. The combined prediction for A and H bosons with masses of 300, 500 and 800 GeV and $\tan\beta$ = 10 in the hMSSM scenario are also provided.

Observed and predicted mTtot distribution for the b-inclusive selection in the 1l1tau_h channel. Please note that the bin content is divided by the bin width in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table. In the paper, the first bin is cut off at 60 GeV for aesthetics but contains underflows down to 50 GeV as in the HepData table. The last bin includes overflows. The prediction for a SSM Zprime with masses of 1500, 2000 and 2500 GeV are also provided.

Observed and predicted mTtot distribution for the b-inclusive selection in the 2tau_h channel. Please note that the bin content is divided by the bin width in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table. The last bin includes overflows. The prediction for a SSM Zprime with masses of 1500, 2000 and 2500 GeV are also provided.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the b-associated Higgs boson production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the boson mass.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the Drell Yan production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the Zprime boson mass.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the Higgs boson production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the boson mass and the relative strength of the b-associated production.

Ratio of the 95% CL upper limits on the production cross section times branching fraction for alternate Zprime models with respect to the SSM, both observed and expected are shown.

Acceptance, acceptance times efficiency and b-tag category fraction for a scalar boson produced by gluon-gluon fusion as a function of the scalar boson mass.

Acceptance, acceptance times efficiency and b-tag category fraction for a scalar boson produced by b-associated production as a function of the scalar boson mass.

Acceptance and acceptance times efficiency for a heavy gauge boson produced by Drell Yan as a function of the gauge boson mass.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the gluon-gluon fusion Higgs boson production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the boson mass.

Acceptance for SR1 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Acceptance for SR2 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Acceptance for SR2 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Acceptance for SR2 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Acceptance for SR3 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Acceptance for SR3 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Acceptance for SR3 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Acceptance for SR4 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Acceptance for SR4 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Acceptance for SR4 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Acceptance for SR5 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Acceptance for SR5 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Acceptance for SR5 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Acceptance for best expected CLS SR in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Acceptance for best expected CLS SR in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for best expected CLS SR in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for SR1 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for SR1 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for SR1 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for SR2 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for SR2 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for SR2 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for SR3 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for SR3 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for SR3 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for SR4 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for SR4 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for SR4 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for SR5 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for SR5 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for SR5 in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for best expected CLS SR in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Detector efficiency for best expected CLS SR in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR1 expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR1 expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR1 expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR1 observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR1 observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR1 observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR2 expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR2 expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR2 expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR2 observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR2 observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR2 observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR3 expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR3 expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR3 expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR3 observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR3 observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR3 observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR4 expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR4 expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR4 expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR4 observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR4 observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR4 observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR5 expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR5 expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR5 expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR5 observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR5 observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

SR5 observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for the best expected SR in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for SR1 in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for SR1 in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for SR1 in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for SR2 in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for SR2 in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for SR2 in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for SR3 in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for SR3 in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for SR3 in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for SR4 in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for SR4 in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for SR4 in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for SR5 in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for SR5 in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for SR5 in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for the best expected SR in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Upper limits on signal cross sections and exclusion limits at 95% CL for the best expected SR in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Minimum branching ratio excluded at 95% CL, assuming no sensitivity for other decay possibilities, in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Minimum branching ratio excluded at 95% CL, assuming no sensitivity for other decay possibilities, in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Minimum branching ratio excluded at 95% CL, assuming no sensitivity for other decay possibilities, in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$m(\tilde\chi^0_1)$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

The signal region with the best expected CLS value for each signal in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

The signal region with the best expected CLS value for each signal in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

The signal region with the best expected CLS value for each signal in the $\tilde{t}_1/\tilde{c}_1-\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass plane.

Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$\Delta m$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$\Delta m$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$\Delta m$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$\Delta m$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$\Delta m$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL in the $m(\tilde t_1/\tilde c_1)$-$\Delta m$ plane for the stop/scharm pair production scenario.

Comparison between data and expectation after the background-only fit for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in SR1. The shaded band indicates detector-related systematic uncertainties and the statistical uncertainties of the MC samples, while the error bars on the data points indicate the data's statistical uncertainty. The final bin in each histogram includes the overflow. The lower panel shows the ratio of the data to the SM prediction after the background-only fit. The distribution is also shown for a representative signal point.

Comparison between data and expectation after the background-only fit for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in SR1. The shaded band indicates detector-related systematic uncertainties and the statistical uncertainties of the MC samples, while the error bars on the data points indicate the data's statistical uncertainty. The final bin in each histogram includes the overflow. The lower panel shows the ratio of the data to the SM prediction after the background-only fit. The distribution is also shown for a representative signal point.

Comparison between data and expectation after the background-only fit for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in SR1. The shaded band indicates detector-related systematic uncertainties and the statistical uncertainties of the MC samples, while the error bars on the data points indicate the data's statistical uncertainty. The final bin in each histogram includes the overflow. The lower panel shows the ratio of the data to the SM prediction after the background-only fit. The distribution is also shown for a representative signal point.

Comparison between data and expectation after the background-only fit for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in SR2. The shaded band indicates detector-related systematic uncertainties and the statistical uncertainties of the MC samples, while the error bars on the data points indicate the data's statistical uncertainty. The final bin in each histogram includes the overflow. The lower panel shows the ratio of the data to the SM prediction after the background-only fit. The distribution is also shown for a representative signal point.

Comparison between data and expectation after the background-only fit for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in SR2. The shaded band indicates detector-related systematic uncertainties and the statistical uncertainties of the MC samples, while the error bars on the data points indicate the data's statistical uncertainty. The final bin in each histogram includes the overflow. The lower panel shows the ratio of the data to the SM prediction after the background-only fit. The distribution is also shown for a representative signal point.

Comparison between data and expectation after the background-only fit for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in SR2. The shaded band indicates detector-related systematic uncertainties and the statistical uncertainties of the MC samples, while the error bars on the data points indicate the data's statistical uncertainty. The final bin in each histogram includes the overflow. The lower panel shows the ratio of the data to the SM prediction after the background-only fit. The distribution is also shown for a representative signal point.

Comparison between data and expectation after the background-only fit for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in SR3. The shaded band indicates detector-related systematic uncertainties and the statistical uncertainties of the MC samples, while the error bars on the data points indicate the data's statistical uncertainty. The final bin in each histogram includes the overflow. The lower panel shows the ratio of the data to the SM prediction after the background-only fit. The distribution is also shown for a representative signal point.

Comparison between data and expectation after the background-only fit for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in SR3. The shaded band indicates detector-related systematic uncertainties and the statistical uncertainties of the MC samples, while the error bars on the data points indicate the data's statistical uncertainty. The final bin in each histogram includes the overflow. The lower panel shows the ratio of the data to the SM prediction after the background-only fit. The distribution is also shown for a representative signal point.

Comparison between data and expectation after the background-only fit for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in SR3. The shaded band indicates detector-related systematic uncertainties and the statistical uncertainties of the MC samples, while the error bars on the data points indicate the data's statistical uncertainty. The final bin in each histogram includes the overflow. The lower panel shows the ratio of the data to the SM prediction after the background-only fit. The distribution is also shown for a representative signal point.

Comparison between data and expectation after the background-only fit for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in SR4. The shaded band indicates detector-related systematic uncertainties and the statistical uncertainties of the MC samples, while the error bars on the data points indicate the data's statistical uncertainty. The final bin in each histogram includes the overflow. The lower panel shows the ratio of the data to the SM prediction after the background-only fit. The distribution is also shown for a representative signal point.

Comparison between data and expectation after the background-only fit for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in SR4. The shaded band indicates detector-related systematic uncertainties and the statistical uncertainties of the MC samples, while the error bars on the data points indicate the data's statistical uncertainty. The final bin in each histogram includes the overflow. The lower panel shows the ratio of the data to the SM prediction after the background-only fit. The distribution is also shown for a representative signal point.

Comparison between data and expectation after the background-only fit for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in SR4. The shaded band indicates detector-related systematic uncertainties and the statistical uncertainties of the MC samples, while the error bars on the data points indicate the data's statistical uncertainty. The final bin in each histogram includes the overflow. The lower panel shows the ratio of the data to the SM prediction after the background-only fit. The distribution is also shown for a representative signal point.

Comparison between data and expectation after the background-only fit for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in SR5. The shaded band indicates detector-related systematic uncertainties and the statistical uncertainties of the MC samples, while the error bars on the data points indicate the data's statistical uncertainty. The final bin in each histogram includes the overflow. The lower panel shows the ratio of the data to the SM prediction after the background-only fit. The distribution is also shown for a representative signal point.

Comparison between data and expectation after the background-only fit for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in SR5. The shaded band indicates detector-related systematic uncertainties and the statistical uncertainties of the MC samples, while the error bars on the data points indicate the data's statistical uncertainty. The final bin in each histogram includes the overflow. The lower panel shows the ratio of the data to the SM prediction after the background-only fit. The distribution is also shown for a representative signal point.

Comparison between data and expectation after the background-only fit for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in SR5. The shaded band indicates detector-related systematic uncertainties and the statistical uncertainties of the MC samples, while the error bars on the data points indicate the data's statistical uncertainty. The final bin in each histogram includes the overflow. The lower panel shows the ratio of the data to the SM prediction after the background-only fit. The distribution is also shown for a representative signal point.

Cutflow for the $(m_{\tilde{t}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}}) = (450,425)$ GeV signal point for signal region SR1.

Cutflow for the $(m_{\tilde{t}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}}) = (450,425)$ GeV signal point for signal region SR1.

Cutflow for the $(m_{\tilde{t}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}}) = (450,425)$ GeV signal point for signal region SR1.

Cutflow for the $(m_{\tilde{t}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}}) = (500,420)$ GeV signal point for signal region SR2.

Cutflow for the $(m_{\tilde{t}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}}) = (500,420)$ GeV signal point for signal region SR2.

Cutflow for the $(m_{\tilde{t}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}}) = (500,420)$ GeV signal point for signal region SR2.

Cutflow for the $(m_{\tilde{t}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}}) = (500,350)$ GeV signal point for signal region SR3.

Cutflow for the $(m_{\tilde{t}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}}) = (500,350)$ GeV signal point for signal region SR3.

Cutflow for the $(m_{\tilde{t}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}}) = (500,350)$ GeV signal point for signal region SR3.

Cutflow for the $(m_{\tilde{t}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}}) = (600,350)$ GeV signal point for signal region SR4.

Cutflow for the $(m_{\tilde{t}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}}) = (600,350)$ GeV signal point for signal region SR4.

Cutflow for the $(m_{\tilde{t}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}}) = (600,350)$ GeV signal point for signal region SR4.

Cutflow for the $(m_{\tilde{t}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}}) = (900,1)$ GeV signal point for signal region SR5.

Cutflow for the $(m_{\tilde{t}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}}) = (900,1)$ GeV signal point for signal region SR5.

Cutflow for the $(m_{\tilde{t}}, m_{\tilde{\chi}}) = (900,1)$ GeV signal point for signal region SR5.

Summary of the relative uncertainties in the measured fiducial cross section $\sigma^{\mathrm{fid}}_{W^\pm Z j j-EW}$ . The uncertainties are reported as percentages.

Numbers of observed and expected events in the $W^{\pm}Zjj$ signal region and in the three control regions, after the fit. The expected number of $WZjj-EW$ events from $SHERPA$ and the estimated number of background events from the other processes are shown. The sum of the background containing misidentified leptons is labelled "Misid. leptons". The total correlated post-fit uncertainties are quoted.

Measured $W^{pm}Zjj$ differential cross-section in the VBS fiducial phase space. The relative uncertainties are reported as percentages. The systematic uncertainties are in order of appearance: total uncorrelated systematic and correlated systematics related respectively to unfolding, electrons, muons, jets, reducible and irreducible backgrounds, pileup and luminosity. The last bin is a cross section for all events above the lower end of the bin.

Correlation matrix for the unfolded fiducial cross-section.

Measured $W^{pm}Zjj$ differential cross-section in the VBS fiducial phase space. The relative uncertainties are reported as percentages. The systematic uncertainties are in order of appearance: total uncorrelated systematic and correlated systematics related respectively to unfolding, electrons, muons, jets, reducible and irreducible backgrounds, pileup and luminosity. The last bin is a cross section for all events above the lower end of the bin.

Correlation matrix for the unfolded fiducial cross-section.

Measured $W^{pm}Zjj$ differential cross-section in the VBS fiducial phase space. The relative uncertainties are reported as percentages. The systematic uncertainties are in order of appearance: total uncorrelated systematic and correlated systematics related respectively to unfolding, electrons, muons, jets, reducible and irreducible backgrounds, pileup and luminosity.

Correlation matrix for the unfolded fiducial cross-section.

Measured $W^{pm}Zjj$ differential cross-section in the VBS fiducial phase space. The relative uncertainties are reported as percentages. The systematic uncertainties are in order of appearance: total uncorrelated systematic and correlated systematics related respectively to unfolding, electrons, muons, jets, reducible and irreducible backgrounds, pileup and luminosity. The last bin is a cross section for all events above the lower end of the bin.

Correlation matrix for the unfolded fiducial cross-section.

Measured $W^{pm}Zjj$ differential cross-section in the VBS fiducial phase space. The relative uncertainties are reported as percentages. The systematic uncertainties are in order of appearance: total uncorrelated systematic and correlated systematics related respectively to unfolding, electrons, muons, jets, reducible and irreducible backgrounds, pileup and luminosity. The last bin is a cross section for all events above the lower end of the bin.

Correlation matrix for the unfolded fiducial cross-section.

Measured $W^{pm}Zjj$ differential cross-section in the VBS fiducial phase space. The relative uncertainties are reported as percentages. The systematic uncertainties are in order of appearance: total uncorrelated systematic and correlated systematics related respectively to unfolding, electrons, muons, jets, reducible and irreducible backgrounds, pileup and luminosity.

Correlation matrix for the unfolded fiducial cross-section.

Measured $W^{pm}Zjj$ differential cross-section in the VBS fiducial phase space. The relative uncertainties are reported as percentages. The systematic uncertainties are in order of appearance: total uncorrelated systematic and correlated systematics related respectively to unfolding, electrons, muons, jets, reducible and irreducible backgrounds, pileup and luminosity. The last bin is a cross section for all events above the lower end of the bin.

Correlation matrix for the unfolded fiducial cross-section.

Measured $W^{pm}Zjj$ differential cross-section in the VBS fiducial phase space. The relative uncertainties are reported as percentages. The systematic uncertainties are in order of appearance: total uncorrelated systematic and correlated systematics related respectively to unfolding, electrons, muons, jets, reducible and irreducible backgrounds, pileup and luminosity. the last bin is a cross section for all events above the lower end of the bin.

Correlation matrix for the unfolded fiducial cross-section.

Distributions of kinematic variables in the signal regions for the $2\ell$ channels after applying all selection requirements. The histograms show the post-fit background predictions. The last bin includes the overflow. The distribution for $R_{\textrm{ISR}}$ in SR$2\ell$_ISR is plotted. The expected distribution for a benchmark signal model, normalized to the NLO+NLL cross-section times integrated luminosity, is also shown for comparison.

Distributions of kinematic variables in the signal regions for the $3\ell$ channels after applying all selection requirements. The histograms show the post-fit background predictions. The last bin includes the overflow. The distribution for $H_{3,1}^{\textrm{PP}}$ in SR$3\ell$_Low is plotted. The expected distribution for a benchmark signal model, normalized to the NLO+NLL cross-section times integrated luminosity, is also shown for comparison.

Distributions of kinematic variables in the signal regions for the $3\ell$ channels after applying all selection requirements. The histograms show the post-fit background predictions. The last bin includes the overflow. The distribution of $p_{\textrm{T}}^{\ell_{1}}$ in SR$3\ell$_Low is plotted. The expected distribution for a benchmark signal model, normalized to the NLO+NLL cross-section times integrated luminosity, is also shown for comparison.

Distributions of kinematic variables in the signal regions for the $3\ell$ channels after applying all selection requirements. The histograms show the post-fit background predictions. The last bin includes the overflow. The distribution of $p_{\mathrm{T\ ISR}}^{~\textrm{CM}}$ in SR$3\ell$_ISR is plotted. The expected distribution for a benchmark signal model, normalized to the NLO+NLL cross-section times integrated luminosity, is also shown for comparison.

Distributions of kinematic variables in the signal regions for the $3\ell$ channels after applying all selection requirements. The histograms show the post-fit background predictions. The last bin includes the overflow. The distribution of $R_{\textrm{ISR}}$ in SR$3\ell$_ISR is plotted. The expected distribution for a benchmark signal model, normalized to the NLO+NLL cross-section times integrated luminosity, is also shown for comparison.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL on the masses of C1/N2 and N1 from the analysis of 36.1fb$^{-1}$ of 13 TeV $pp$ collision data obtained from the 2$\ell$ search, assuming 100\% branching ratio of the sparticles to decay to SM $W/Z$ bosons and LSP.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL on the masses of C1/N2 and N1 from the analysis of 36.1fb$^{-1}$ of 13 TeV $pp$ collision data obtained from the 2$\ell$ search, assuming 100% branching ratio of the sparticles to decay to SM $W/Z$ bosons and LSP.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL on the masses of C1/N2 and N1 from the analysis of 36.1fb$^{-1}$ of 13 TeV $pp$ collision data obtained from the the $3\ell$ search, assuming 100% branching ratio of the sparticles to decay to SM $W/Z$ bosons and LSP.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL on the masses of C1/N2 and N1 from the analysis of 36.1fb$^{-1}$ of 13 TeV $pp$ collision data obtained from the the $3\ell$ search, assuming 100% branching ratio of the sparticles to decay to SM $W/Z$ bosons and LSP.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL on the masses of C1/N2 and N1 from the analysis of 36.1fb$^{-1}$ of 13 TeV $pp$ collision data obtained from the statistical combination of the $2\ell$ and 3$\ell$ search channels, assuming 100\% branching ratio of the sparticles to decay to SM $W/Z$ bosons and LSP.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL on the masses of C1/N2 and N1 from the analysis of 36.1fb$^{-1}$ of 13 TeV $pp$ collision data obtained from the statistical combination of the $2\ell$ and 3$\ell$ search channels, assuming 100% branching ratio of the sparticles to decay to SM $W/Z$ bosons and LSP.

Signal region acceptance for chargino-neutralino production in SR2L_High. The acceptance is with respect to all possible $W/Z$ decays.

Signal region efficiency for chargino-neutralino production in SR2L_High.

Signal region acceptanceXefficiency for chargino-neutralino production in SR2L_High.

Signal region acceptance for chargino-neutralino production in SR2L_Int. The acceptance is with respect to all possible $W/Z$ decays.

Signal region efficiency for chargino-neutralino production in SR2L_Int.

Signal region acceptanceXefficiency for chargino-neutralino production in SR2L_Int.

Signal region acceptance for chargino-neutralino production in SR2L_Low. The acceptance is with respect to all possible $W/Z$ decays.

Signal region efficiency for chargino-neutralino production in SR2L_Low.

Signal region acceptanceXefficiency for chargino-neutralino production in SR2L_Low.

Signal region acceptance for chargino-neutralino production in SR2L_ISR. The acceptance is with respect to all possible $W/Z$ decays.

Signal region efficiency for chargino-neutralino production in SR2L_ISR.

Signal region acceptanceXefficiency for chargino-neutralino production in SR2L_ISR.

Signal region acceptance for chargino-neutralino production in SR3L_High. The acceptance is with respect to all possible $W/Z$ decays.

Signal region efficiency for chargino-neutralino production in SR3L_High.

Signal region acceptanceXefficiency for chargino-neutralino production in SR3L_High.

Signal region acceptance for chargino-neutralino production in SR3L_Int. The acceptance is with respect to all possible $W/Z$ decays.

Signal region efficiency for chargino-neutralino production in SR3L_Int.

Signal region acceptanceXefficiency for chargino-neutralino production in SR3L_Int.

Signal region acceptance for chargino-neutralino production in SR3L_Low. The acceptance is with respect to all possible $W/Z$ decays.

Signal region efficiency for chargino-neutralino production in SR3L_Low.

Signal region acceptanceXefficiency for chargino-neutralino production in SR3L_Low.

Signal region acceptance for chargino-neutralino production in SR3L_ISR. The acceptance is with respect to all possible $W/Z$ decays.

Signal region efficiency for chargino-neutralino production in SR3L_ISR.

Signal region acceptanceXefficiency for chargino-neutralino production in SR3L_ISR.

Observed 95% CL upper limit on the production cross-section of C1/N2 from the analysis of 36.1fb$^{-1}$ of 13 TeV $pp$ collision data obtained from the 2$\ell$ search, assuming 100% branching ratio of the sparticles to decay to SM $W/Z$ bosons and N1.

Observed 95% CL upper limit on the production cross-section of C1/N2 from the analysis of 36.1fb$^{-1}$ of 13 TeV $pp$ collision data obtained from the 3$\ell$ search, assuming 100% branching ratio of the sparticles to decay to SM $W/Z$ bosons and N1.

Observed 95% CL upper limit on the production cross-section of C1/N2 from the analysis of 36.1fb$^{-1}$ of 13 TeV $pp$ collision data obtained from the statistical combination of 2 and 3$\ell$ searches, assuming 100% branching ratio of the sparticles to decay to SM $W/Z$ bosons and N1.

Signal cutflow for SR2L_High and m[C1/N2,N1] = [500,0] GeV. 5000 events were generated for this point. The unweighted number of events correspond to the number of selected MC events in the produced sample, while the weighted yield is normalized to the luminosity of the data.

Signal cutflow for SR2L_Int and m[C1/N2,N1] = [400,200] GeV. 10000 events were generated for this point. The unweighted number of events correspond to the number of selected MC events in the produced sample, while the weighted yield is normalized to the luminosity of the data.

Signal cutflow for SR2L_Low and m[C1/N2,N1] = [200,100] GeV. 20000 events were generated for this point. The unweighted number of events correspond to the number of selected MC events in the produced sample, while the weighted yield is normalized to the luminosity of the data.

Signal cutflow for SR2L_ISR and m[C1/N2,N1] = [200,100] GeV. 20000 events were generated for this point. The unweighted number of events correspond to the number of selected MC events in the produced sample, while the weighted yield is normalized to the luminosity of the data.

Signal cutflow for SR3L_High and m[C1/N2,N1] = [500,0] GeV. 5000 events were generated for this point. The unweighted number of events correspond to the number of selected MC events in the produced sample, while the weighted yield is normalized to the luminosity of the data.

Signal cutflow for SR3L_Int and m[C1/N2,N1] = [400,200] GeV. 10000 events were generated for this point. The unweighted number of events correspond to the number of selected MC events in the produced sample, while the weighted yield is normalized to the luminosity of the data.

Signal cutflow for SR3L_Low and m[C1/N2,N1] = [200,100] GeV. 20000 events were generated for this point. The unweighted number of events correspond to the number of selected MC events in the produced sample, while the weighted yield is normalized to the luminosity of the data.

Signal cutflow for SR3L_ISR and m[C1/N2,N1] = [200,100] GeV. 20000 events were generated for this point. The unweighted number of events correspond to the number of selected MC events in the produced sample, while the weighted yield is normalized to the luminosity of the data.

Dijet mass spectra after the background only fit with the background prediction in the high-mass region with two b-tags.

Dijet mass spectra after the background only fit with the background prediction in the low-mass region with two b-tags.

The online b-tagging efficiency with respect to the offline b-tagging efficiency as a function of pT. The b-tagging online and offline working points correspond to an efficiency of 60% and 70%, respectively.

Observed and expected 95% credibility-level upper limits on the cross-section for the b* model in the high-mass region with inclusive b-jet selection.

Observed and expected 95% credibility-level upper limits on the cross-section times branching ratio for the SSM and leptophobic Z' models in the low- and high-mass region with two b-tags selection.

Observed and expected 95% credibility-level upper limits on the cross-section for DM Z' models in the low-mass region with two b-tags selection. The Z' is expected to decay to all five quark flavors other than the top quark and the mediator to SM quark coupling (gSM) equal to 0.1 is assumed.

Observed and expected 95% credibility-level upper limits on the cross-section times branching ratio for DM Z'->bb models in the high-mass region with two b-tags selection. The Z' is expected to decay to bb only and the mediator to SM quark coupling (gSM) equal to 0.25 is assumed.

Observed and expected 95% credibility-level upper limits on cross section times acceptance times branching ratio of X --> bb, including kinematic acceptance and b-tagging efficiencies, for resonances with intrinsic width smaller than the detector resolution. The width of the Gaussian reconstructed shape is dominated by the dijet mass resolution. The table shows the limits obtained from the high-mass inclusive one b-tag selection.

Observed and expected 95% credibility-level upper limits on cross section times acceptance times branching ratio of X --> bb, including kinematic acceptance and b-tagging efficiencies, for resonances with intrinsic width smaller than the detector resolution. The width of the Gaussian reconstructed shape is dominated by the dijet mass resolution. The table shows the limits obtained from the combined low- and high-mass two b-tags selection.

The mass distributions for the inclusive one b-tagged selection and two b-tagged selection using an integrated luminosity of 36.1 $fb^{-1}$. The inclusive one b-tagged Pythia8 MC distribution is normalized to the inclusive one b-tagged data. The two b-tagged Pythia8 MC distribution is normalized to the two b-tagged data. The systematic uncertainty band is dominated by the b-tagging scale factor and the b-jet energy scale.

Signal acceptance times efficiency for inclusive 1 b-tag and 2 b-tag categories as a function of the simulated b* and the Z' masses.

Signal acceptance times efficiency for 2 b-tag categories as a function of the simulated Z' masses.

The flavor composition of the simulated dijet background as a function of dijet mass before tagging. The fraction of the six combinations of the b-jet , c-jet and light-flavor jet are shown. All offline selections are applied.

The flavor composition of the simulated dijet background as a function of dijet mass with inclusive one b-tag. The fraction of the six combinations of the b-jet , c-jet and light-flavor jet are shown. All offline selections are applied.

The flavor composition of the simulated dijet background as a function of dijet mass with two b-tags. The fraction of the six combinations of the b-jet , c-jet and light-flavor jet are shown. All offline selections are applied.

Observed and expected 95% credibility-level upper limits on cross section times acceptance times branching ratio of X --> bb, including kinematic acceptance and b-tagging efficiencies, for resonances exhibiting a generic Gaussian shape at particle level. The table shows the limits obtained from the inclusive b-jet selection. The limits corresponding to Gaussian-shaped resonances with width of Γ(X)/m(X) = 3%.

Observed and expected 95% credibility-level upper limits on cross section times acceptance times branching ratio of X --> bb, including kinematic acceptance and b-tagging efficiencies, for resonances exhibiting a generic Gaussian shape at particle level. The table shows the limits obtained from the inclusive b-jet selection. The limits corresponding to Gaussian-shaped resonances with width of Γ(X)/m(X) = 7%.

Observed and expected 95% credibility-level upper limits on cross section times acceptance times branching ratio of X --> bb, including kinematic acceptance and b-tagging efficiencies, for resonances exhibiting a generic Gaussian shape at particle level. The table shows the limits obtained from the inclusive b-jet selection. The limits corresponding to Gaussian-shaped resonances with width of Γ(X)/m(X) = 10%.

Observed and expected 95% credibility-level upper limits on cross section times acceptance times branching ratio of X --> bb, including kinematic acceptance and b-tagging efficiencies, for resonances exhibiting a generic Gaussian shape at particle level. The table shows the limits obtained from the inclusive b-jet selection. The limits corresponding to Gaussian-shaped resonances with width of Γ(X)/m(X) = 15%.

Observed and expected 95% credibility-level upper limits on cross section times acceptance times branching ratio of X --> bb, including kinematic acceptance and b-tagging efficiencies, for resonances exhibiting a generic Gaussian shape at particle level. The table shows the limits obtained from the combined low- and high-mass two b-tags selection. The limits corresponding to Gaussian-shaped resonances with width of Γ(X)/m(X) = 3%.

Observed and expected 95% credibility-level upper limits on cross section times acceptance times branching ratio of X --> bb, including kinematic acceptance and b-tagging efficiencies, for resonances exhibiting a generic Gaussian shape at particle level. The table shows the limits obtained from the combined low- and high-mass two b-tags selection. The limits corresponding to Gaussian-shaped resonances with width of Γ(X)/m(X) = 7%.

Observed and expected 95% credibility-level upper limits on cross section times acceptance times branching ratio of X --> bb, including kinematic acceptance and b-tagging efficiencies, for resonances exhibiting a generic Gaussian shape at particle level. The table shows the limits obtained from the combined low- and high-mass two b-tags selection. The limits corresponding to Gaussian-shaped resonances with width of Γ(X)/m(X) = 10%.

Observed and expected 95% credibility-level upper limits on cross section times acceptance times branching ratio of X --> bb, including kinematic acceptance and b-tagging efficiencies, for resonances exhibiting a generic Gaussian shape at particle level. The table shows the limits obtained from the combined low- and high-mass two b-tags selection. The limits corresponding to Gaussian-shaped resonances with width of Γ(X)/m(X) = 15%.

Acceptance x efficiency versus resonance mass for both lephad and hadhad channels in the RS bulk model with k/MPl = 1

Acceptance x efficiency versus resonance mass for both lephad and hadhad channels in the RS bulk model with k/MPl = 2

Acceptance x efficiency versus resonance mass for both lephad and hadhad channels in the scalar model

Upper limits on the production cross-section times the HH to bbtautau branching ratio for non-resonant HH at 95% CLS and their interpretation as multiples of the SM prediction

Upper limits on the production cross-section times the HH to bbtautau branching ratio divided by the SM prediction for non-resonant HH at 95% CL

Post-fit expected number of signal and background events and observed number of data events after applying the selection criteria and requiring exactly 2 b-tagged jets and assuming a background-only hypothesis

Post-fit expected number of signal and background events and observed number of data events in the last two bins of the non-resonant BDT score distribution of the SM signal after applying the selection criteria and requiring exactly 2 b-tagged jets and assuming a background-only hypothesis

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.

No description provided.