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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W= 1.3147 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W= 1.3289 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W= 1.3430 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W= 1.3569 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W= 1.3707 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W= 1.3843 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W= 1.3978 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W= 1.4112 GeV

Photon beam asymmetry Sigma at W= 1.4244 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.3693 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.3897 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.4098 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.4296 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.4492 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.4685 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.4875 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.5063 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.5249 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.5432 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.5614 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.5793 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.5970 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.6146 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.6319 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.6491 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.6660 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.6828 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.6995 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.7160 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.7323 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.7485 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.7645 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.7804 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.7961 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.8117 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.8272 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.8425 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.8577 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.8728 GeV

Target asymmetry T for c.m. energy W= 1.8878 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.3062 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.3275 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.3486 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.3693 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.3897 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.4098 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.4296 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.4492 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.4685 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.4875 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.5063 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.5249 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.5432 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.5614 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.5793 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.5970 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.6146 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.6319 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.6491 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.6660 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.6828 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.6995 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.7160 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.7323 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.7485 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.7645 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.7804 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.7961 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.8117 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.8272 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.8425 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.8577 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.8728 GeV

Beam-target asymmetry F for c.m. energy W= 1.8878 GeV

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

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

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

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

Zero-crossing points determined with an amplitude fit.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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