Distribution of the resonance mass in the c-tag Signal Region of the $ ce$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the b-tag Signal Region of the $ ce$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the untagged Signal Region of the $ c\mu$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the c-tag Signal Region of the $ c\mu$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the b-tag Signal Region of the $ c\mu$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the 0-tag Signal Region of the $ be$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the 1-tag Signal Region of the $ be$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the 2-tag Signal Region of the $ be$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the 0-tag Signal Region of the $ b\mu$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the 1-tag Signal Region of the $ b\mu$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the 2-tag Signal Region of the $ b\mu$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark pair production cross-section at 95% CL for $\mathcal{B}=1$ into electrons, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $qe$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark pair production cross-section at 95% CL for $\mathcal{B}=1$ into muons, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $q\mu$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark pair production cross-section at 95% CL for $\mathcal{B}=1$ into electrons, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $ce$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark pair production cross-section at 95% CL for $\mathcal{B}=1$ into muons, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $c\mu$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark pair production cross-section at 95% CL for $\mathcal{B}=1$ into electrons, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $be$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark pair production cross-section at 95% CL for $\mathcal{B}=1$ into muons, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $b\mu$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark branching ratio at 95% CL, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $qe$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark branching ratio at 95% CL, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $q\mu$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark branching ratio at 95% CL, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $ce$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark branching ratio at 95% CL, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $c\mu$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark branching ratio at 95% CL, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $be$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark branching ratio at 95% CL, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $b\mu$ channel.

The signal selection efficiency x acceptance summed over all signal regions, for all masses and LQ decay channels considered.

The observed and expected limits for all masses and LQ decay channels considered.

Cutflow Table in the electron channel, considering signal samples with LQ mass of 1 TeV.

Cutflow Table in the muon channel, considering signal samples with LQ mass of 1 TeV.

Observed and expected 95% credibility-level upper limits on the cross-section times branching ratio for the simplified dark-matter model. The table also shows the corresponding $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ bands for the expected limits. The limits are calculated using jets in events with at least one isolated lepton ($e$ or $\mu$) with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV.

The 95% CL upper limits on the cross-section times acceptance times efficiency times branching ratio, as a function of the resonance mass, $m_X$. The limits are calculated using jets in events with at least one isolated lepton ($e$ or $\mu$) with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV. The limits are shown for a generic Gaussian signal with the width $\sigma_{X}/m_{X} =0$. The table also shows the expected limits and the corresponding $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ bands. The tabulated data has been used in Figure 04 of the publication.

The 95% CL upper limits on the cross-section times acceptance times efficiency times branching ratio, as a function of the resonance mass, $m_X$. The limits are calculated using jets in events with at least one isolated lepton ($e$ or $\mu$) with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV. The limits are shown for a generic Gaussian signal with the width $\sigma_{X}/m_{X} =0.05$. The table also shows the expected limits and the corresponding $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ bands. The tabulated data has been used in Figure 04 of the publication.

The 95% CL upper limits on the cross-section times acceptance times efficiency times branching ratio, as a function of the resonance mass, $m_X$. The limits are calculated using jets in events with at least one isolated lepton ($e$ or $\mu$) with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV. The limits are shown for a generic Gaussian signal with the width $\sigma_{X}/m_{X} =0.10$. The table also shows the expected limits and the corresponding $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ bands. The tabulated data has been used in Figure 04 of the publication.

The 95% CL upper limits on the cross-section times acceptance times efficiency times branching ratio, as a function of the resonance mass, $m_X$. The limits are calculated using jets in events with at least one isolated lepton ($e$ or $\mu$) with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV. The limits are shown for a generic Gaussian signal with the width $\sigma_{X}/m_{X} =0.15$. The table also shows the expected limits and the corresponding $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ bands. The tabulated data has been used in Figure 04 of the publication.

Truth-level cross-sections ($\sigma$), acceptances ($A$), detector efficiencies ($\epsilon$) and the detector-level visible cross-sections ($\sigma^{vis}$) for different masses of the $\rho_T$ model. Only statistical uncertainties on the acceptances and efficiencies are shown. The acceptance is defined by requiring jets with $m_{jj} >216$ GeV and $|\eta|<2.4$, as well as isolated leptons ($e$ or $\mu$) with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV and $|\eta^\mu|<2.5$ ($|\eta^e|<2.47$, excluding of the gap region 1.37--1.52) for muons (electrons). The tabulated data has been used in Figure 05a of the publication.

Truth-level cross-sections ($\sigma$), acceptances ($A$), detector efficiencies ($\epsilon$) and the detector-level visible cross-sections ($\sigma^{vis}$) for different masses of the $W'/Z'$ SSM model. Only statistical uncertainties on the acceptances and efficiencies are shown. The acceptance is defined by requiring jets with $m_{jj} >216$ GeV and $|\eta|<2.4$, as well as leptons with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV and $|\eta^\mu|<2.5$ ($|\eta^e|<2.47$ with exclusion of the gap region 1.37-1.52) for muons (electrons). The tabulated data has been used in Figure 05b of the publication.

Truth-level cross-sections ($\sigma$), acceptances ($A$), detector efficiencies ($\epsilon$) and the detector-level visible cross-sections ($\sigma^{vis}$) for different masses of the $H^+$ model for $\tan \beta=1$. Only statistical uncertainties on the acceptances and efficiencies are shown. The acceptance correction was calculated assuming $\tan \beta=1$ and the narrow-width approximation. The acceptance is defined by requiring jets with $m_{jj} >216$ GeV and $|\eta|<2.4$, as well as leptons with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV and $|\eta^\mu|<2.5$ ($|\eta^e|<2.47$ with exclusion of the gap region 1.37-1.52) for muons (electrons). The tabulated data has been used in Figure 05c of the publication.

Truth-level cross-sections ($\sigma$), acceptances ($A$), detector efficiencies ($\epsilon$) and the detector-level visible cross-sections ($\sigma^{vis}$) for different masses of the $Z'$ (DM) model. Only statistical uncertainties on the acceptances and efficiencies are shown. The acceptance is defined by requiring jets with $m_{jj} > 216$ GeV and $|\eta|<2.4$, as well as leptons with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV and $|\eta^\mu|<2.5$ ($|\eta^e|<2.47$ with exclusion of the gap region 1.37-1.52) for muons (electrons). The tabulated data has been used in Figure 05d of the publication.

A comparison of the measured cell $E_T^{miss}$ distribution with that predicted by the two-component model for two pile-up scenarios. The magenta points extend the measured distribution using L1 $E_T^{miss} > 30\,$GeV and L1 $E_T^{miss} > 50\,$GeV data. The red curve is the prediction from the calorimeter-resolution part of the model. The green curve is the high $E_T^{miss}$ tail's probability distribution for the mean number of $pp$ interactions $\mu$ in each figure. The blue curve is the full model prediction computed by combining the $E_T^{miss}$ from these two individual sources shown in red and green, each calculated for $\mu=\langle\mu\rangle$. The black points show the unbiased $E_T^{miss}$ distribution measured in data. Corresponds to a prediction for $\langle\mu\rangle = 55$.

A comparison of the measured cell $E_T^{miss}$ distribution with that predicted by the two-component model for two pile-up scenarios. The magenta points extend the measured distribution using L1 $E_T^{miss} > 30\,$GeV and L1 $E_T^{miss} > 50\,$GeV data. The red curve is the prediction from the calorimeter-resolution part of the model. The green curve is the high $E_T^{miss}$ tail's probability distribution for the mean number of $pp$ interactions $\mu$ in each figure. The blue curve is the full model prediction computed by combining the $E_T^{miss}$ from these two individual sources shown in red and green, each calculated for $\mu=\langle\mu\rangle$. The black points show the unbiased $E_T^{miss}$ distribution measured in data. Corresponds to a prediction for $\langle\mu\rangle = 55$.

The $E_T^{miss}$ model predicted trigger rate as a function of $\mu$ for the cell $E_T^{miss}$ algorithm with a threshold of $80\,$GeV and $120\,$GeV, assuming no additional pile-up mitigation.

The efficiencies in the plot are shown for events satisfying a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection and with $p_T(\mu\mu)$ larger than $150\,$GeV vs pile-up for each of the four years of data taking.

The L1 $E_T^{miss}$ trigger rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for runs in three different periods ($\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$) in the year 2017.

The L1 $E_T^{miss}$ trigger rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for runs in three different periods ($\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$) in the year 2017.

The L1 $E_T^{miss}$ trigger rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for runs in three different periods ($\alpha$, $\beta$, $\gamma$) in the year 2017.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $0\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 20$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $0\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 20$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $0\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 20$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $0\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 20$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $0\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 20$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $20\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 30$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $20\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 30$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $20\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 30$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $20\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 30$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $20\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 30$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $30\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 40$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $30\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 40$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $30\leq\langle\mu\rangle < 40$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $40\leq\langle\mu\rangle$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $40\leq\langle\mu\rangle$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $40\leq\langle\mu\rangle$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $40\leq\langle\mu\rangle$.

Background acceptance vs signal efficiency for each of four individual HLT $E_T^{miss}$ algorithms for a $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selection with $p_T(\mu\mu) > 175\,$GeV for data recorded in the year 2017. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger. $40\leq\langle\mu\rangle$.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Relative background acceptance fraction vs. relative efficiency for two different $p_T(\mu\mu)>150\,$GeV threshold for data recorded in the year 2018. Two of the curves show the performance of the stand-alone cell algorithm and the stand-alone pufit algorithm. The other two show combined algorithms each formed by requiring that the event satisfy both a fixed threshold (either 65 GeV or 70 GeV as shown in the legend) for the cell algorithm and a pufit threshold which varies along the curve. In each plot the background acceptance fractions and the efficiencies are relative to those of the pufit $E_T^{miss} > 110\,$GeV trigger and thus can be greater than one. The diamond indicates the performance of the pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV trigger while the cross indicates the performance of the combined (pufit $E_T^{miss}>110\,$GeV and cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV) trigger.

Turn-on efficiency curves are shown for $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ events for three algorithms: the cell algorithm alone, the pufit algorithm alone and the combined cell+pufit algorithm. The thresholds are set such that the algorithms have equal rates, and the data were recorded in the year 2018. Here the trigger efficiency is shown with respect to $p_T(\mu\mu)$.

Turn-on efficiency curves are shown for $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ events for three algorithms: the cell algorithm alone, the pufit algorithm alone and the combined cell+pufit algorithm. The thresholds are set such that the algorithms have equal rates, and the data were recorded in the year 2018. Here the trigger efficiency is shown with respect to the offline $E_T^{miss}$ calculation with muons treated as being invisible.

Efficiencies for $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ events are shown for the L1 $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV trigger and for the complete L1+HLT trigger chain that also requires pufit > 110 GeV. Each is shown as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for a $p_T(\mu\mu)$ threshold of 150 GeV.

Efficiencies for $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ events are shown for the L1 $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV trigger and for the complete L1+HLT trigger chain that also requires pufit > 110 GeV. Each is shown as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for an offline $E_T^{miss}$ threshold of 150 GeV.

Efficiencies for $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ events are shown for the L1 $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV trigger and for the complete L1+HLT trigger chain that also requires pufit > 110 GeV. Each is shown as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for an $p_T(\mu\mu)$ threshold of 175 GeV.

Efficiencies for $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ events are shown for the L1 $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV trigger and for the complete L1+HLT trigger chain that also requires pufit > 110 GeV. Each is shown as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for an offline $E_T^{miss}$ threshold of 175 GeV.

HLT_xe70_mht trigger output rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ shown for an example run in year 2015.

HLT_xe90_mht trigger output rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ shown for an example run in year 2016.

HLT_xe110_mht trigger output rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ shown for an example run in year 2016.

HLT_xe110_pufit trigger output rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ shown for an example run in year 2017. This trigger included an implicit requirement of cell $E_T^{miss}>50\,$GeV.

HLT_xe110_pufit_xe65 trigger output rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ shown for an example run in year 2018.

HLT_xe110_pufit_xe70 trigger output rate as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ shown for an example run in year 2018.

Full-chain trigger efficiencies for each year as a function of $p_T(\mu\mu)$. The efficiency corresponds to that of the lowest unprescaled trigger that is adjusted throughout each year.

Full-chain trigger efficiencies for 2015, 2016, 2017 and 2018 as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for $p_T(\mu\mu)>150$ GeV. The efficiency corresponds to that of the lowest unprescaled trigger that is adjusted throughout the year.

Efficiencies for the first-level trigger L1XE50 and the combined L1+HLT trigger chain HLT_xe110_pufit_xe65_L1XE50 in data recorded in the year 2018 are shown as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for $W\rightarrow e\nu$ and $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selections with offline $E_T^{miss}>150\,$GeV.

Efficiencies for the first-level trigger L1XE50 and the combined L1+HLT trigger chain HLT_xe110_pufit_xe65_L1XE50 in data recorded in the year 2018 are shown as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for $t\bar t$ with offline $E_T^{miss}>150\,$GeV.

Efficiencies for the first-level trigger L1XE50 and the combined L1+HLT trigger chain HLT_xe110_pufit_xe65_L1XE50 in data recorded in the year 2018 are shown as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for $W\rightarrow e\nu$ and $Z\rightarrow\mu\mu$ selections with offline $E_T^{miss}>175\,$GeV.

Efficiencies for the first-level trigger L1XE50 and the combined L1+HLT trigger chain HLT_xe110_pufit_xe65_L1XE50 in data recorded in the year 2018 are shown as a function of $\langle\mu\rangle$ for $t\bar t$ with offline $E_T^{miss}>175\,$GeV.

The observed upper limits on the model cross-section in units of pb for simplified models with ${\tilde{\tau}}_L {\tilde{\tau}}_L$ only production. Three points at $M({\tilde{\chi}}^{0}_{1})=200GeV$ were removed from the plot but kept in the table because they overlapped with the plot's legend and are far from the exclusion contour.

The observed 95\% CL exclusion contours for the combined fit of SR-lowMass and SR-highMass for simplified models with combined ${\tilde{\tau}}^{+}_{R,L} {\tilde{\tau}}^{-}_{R,L}$ production.

The observed 95\% CL exclusion contours for the combined fit of SR-lowMass and SR-highMass for simplified models with combined ${\tilde{\tau}}^{+}_{R,L} {\tilde{\tau}}^{-}_{R,L}$ production.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the combined fit of SR-lowMass and SR-highMass for simplified models with combined ${\tilde{\tau}}^{+}_{R,L} {\tilde{\tau}}^{-}_{R,L}$ production.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the combined fit of SR-lowMass and SR-highMass for simplified models with combined ${\tilde{\tau}}^{+}_{R,L} {\tilde{\tau}}^{-}_{R,L}$ production.

The observed 95% CL exclusion contours for the combined fit of SR-lowMass and SR-highMass for simplified models with ${\tilde{\tau}}_L {\tilde{\tau}}_L$ only production.

The observed 95% CL exclusion contours for the combined fit of SR-lowMass and SR-highMass for simplified models with ${\tilde{\tau}}_L {\tilde{\tau}}_L$ only production.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the combined fit of SR-lowMass and SR-highMass for simplified models with ${\tilde{\tau}}_L {\tilde{\tau}}_L$ only production.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contours for the combined fit of SR-lowMass and SR-highMass for simplified models with ${\tilde{\tau}}_L {\tilde{\tau}}_L$ only production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for simplified models with direct stau pair production in SR-lowMass.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for simplified models with direct stau pair production in SR-lowMass.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for simplified models with direct stau pair production in SR-lowMass.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for simplified models with direct stau pair production in SR-lowMass.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for simplified models with direct stau pair production in SR-highMass.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for simplified models with direct stau pair production in SR-highMass.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for simplified models with direct stau pair production in SR-highMass.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for simplified models with direct stau pair production in SR-highMass.

Signal acceptance in SR highMass for combined stau final states

Signal acceptance in SR highMass for combined stau final states

Signal acceptance in SR lowMass for combined stau final states

Signal acceptance in SR lowMass for combined stau final states

Signal efficiency in SR highMass for combined stau final states

Signal efficiency in SR highMass for combined stau final states

Signal efficiency in SR lowMass for combined stau final states

Signal efficiency in SR lowMass for combined stau final states

Signal acceptance*efficiency in SR highMass for combined stau final states

Signal acceptance*efficiency in SR highMass for combined stau final states

Signal acceptance*efficiency in SR lowMass for combined stau final states

Signal acceptance*efficiency in SR lowMass for combined stau final states

Cutflow for two reference points (${\tilde{\tau}}^{+}_{R,L} {\tilde{\tau}}^{-}_{R,L}$ production) in SR. The column labelled $N_{weighted}$ shows the results including all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 139 fb$^{-1}$, while $N_{raw}$ in brackets shows the results for the generated number of events. The quoted uncertainties are statistical only. The "Generator filter" includes the requirements that two $\tau$ in the event have ${p}_{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| <$ 2.6. The "Baseline Cut" includes the requirement of two baseline $\tau$ with a minimum value at 0.01 of the boosted decision tree discriminant (JetBDTSigTransMin $>$ 0.01) and ${p}_{T, \tau_{1}} > 50$ GeV and ${p}_{T, \tau_{2}} > 40$ GeV. At the step "Trigger & offline cuts", the following requirements are applied: the event is recorded using the asymmetric di-$\tau$ trigger (di-$\tau$ $E_{T}^{miss}$ trigger) in SR-lowMass (SR-highMass), and the lepton $p_{T}$ and $E_{T}^{miss}$ are required at plateau.

Cutflow for two reference points (${\tilde{\tau}}^{+}_{R,L} {\tilde{\tau}}^{-}_{R,L}$ production) in SR. The column labelled $N_{weighted}$ shows the results including all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 139 fb$^{-1}$, while $N_{raw}$ in brackets shows the results for the generated number of events. The quoted uncertainties are statistical only. The "Generator filter" includes the requirements that two $\tau$ in the event have ${p}_{T} > 15$ GeV and $|\eta| <$ 2.6. The "Baseline Cut" includes the requirement of two baseline $\tau$ with a minimum value at 0.01 of the boosted decision tree discriminant (JetBDTSigTransMin $>$ 0.01) and ${p}_{T, \tau_{1}} > 50$ GeV and ${p}_{T, \tau_{2}} > 40$ GeV. At the step "Trigger & offline cuts", the following requirements are applied: the event is recorded using the asymmetric di-$\tau$ trigger (di-$\tau$ $E_{T}^{miss}$ trigger) in SR-lowMass (SR-highMass), and the lepton $p_{T}$ and $E_{T}^{miss}$ are required at plateau.

Observed and expected numbers of events in the control and signal regions where all control and signal region bins are included as constraints in the likelihood. The expected event yields of SM processes are given after the background-only fit. The entries marked as "--" are negligible. The uncertainties correspond to the sum in quadrature of statistical and systematic uncertainties. The correlation of systematic uncertainties among control regions and among background processes is fully taken into account.

Observed and expected numbers of events in the control and signal regions where all control and signal region bins are included as constraints in the likelihood. The expected event yields of SM processes are given after the background-only fit. The entries marked as "--" are negligible. The uncertainties correspond to the sum in quadrature of statistical and systematic uncertainties. The correlation of systematic uncertainties among control regions and among background processes is fully taken into account.

The post-fit $m_{T2}$ distribution for SR-lowMass. The stacked histograms show the expected SM backgrounds. The multi-jet contribution is estimated from data using the ABCD method. The contributions of multi-jet and $W$+jets events are scaled with the corresponding normalization factors derived from the background-only fit. The hatched bands represent the sum in quadrature of systematic and statistical uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distributions from the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The last bin includes the overflow events.

The post-fit $m_{T2}$ distribution for SR-lowMass. The stacked histograms show the expected SM backgrounds. The multi-jet contribution is estimated from data using the ABCD method. The contributions of multi-jet and $W$+jets events are scaled with the corresponding normalization factors derived from the background-only fit. The hatched bands represent the sum in quadrature of systematic and statistical uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distributions from the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The last bin includes the overflow events.

The post-fit $m_{T2}$ distribution for SR-highMass. The stacked histograms show the expected SM backgrounds. The multi-jet contribution is estimated from data using the ABCD method. The contributions of multi-jet and $W$+jets events are scaled with the corresponding normalization factors derived from the background-only fit. The hatched bands represent the sum in quadrature of systematic and statistical uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distributions from the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The last bin includes the overflow events.

The post-fit $m_{T2}$ distribution for SR-highMass. The stacked histograms show the expected SM backgrounds. The multi-jet contribution is estimated from data using the ABCD method. The contributions of multi-jet and $W$+jets events are scaled with the corresponding normalization factors derived from the background-only fit. The hatched bands represent the sum in quadrature of systematic and statistical uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distributions from the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The last bin includes the overflow events.

The $m_{T2}$ post-fit distributions in the multi-jet background validation region VR-F (lowMass). The stacked histograms show the contribution of each relevant SM process. The multi-jet shape is taken from VR-E in the ABCD method and the normalization is determined by the transfer factor $T$ and rescaled by a correction factor determined by the fit. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties in the sum of the SM backgrounds shown. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines.

The $m_{T2}$ post-fit distributions in the multi-jet background validation region VR-F (lowMass). The stacked histograms show the contribution of each relevant SM process. The multi-jet shape is taken from VR-E in the ABCD method and the normalization is determined by the transfer factor $T$ and rescaled by a correction factor determined by the fit. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties in the sum of the SM backgrounds shown. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines.

The $m_{T2}$ post-fit distributions in the multi-jet background validation VR-F (highMass). The stacked histograms show the contribution of each relevant SM process. The multi-jet shape is taken from VR-E in the ABCD method and the normalization is determined by the transfer factor $T$ and rescaled by a correction factor determined by the fit. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties in the sum of the SM backgrounds shown. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines.

The $m_{T2}$ post-fit distributions in the multi-jet background validation VR-F (highMass). The stacked histograms show the contribution of each relevant SM process. The multi-jet shape is taken from VR-E in the ABCD method and the normalization is determined by the transfer factor $T$ and rescaled by a correction factor determined by the fit. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties in the sum of the SM backgrounds shown. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines.

The $E_{T}^{miss}$ post-fit distributions in the multi-jet background validation region VR-F (lowMass). The stacked histograms show the contribution of each relevant SM process. The multi-jet shape is taken from VR-E in the ABCD method and the normalization is determined by the transfer factor $T$ and rescaled by a correction factor determined by the fit. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties in the sum of the SM backgrounds shown. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines.

The $E_{T}^{miss}$ post-fit distributions in the multi-jet background validation region VR-F (lowMass). The stacked histograms show the contribution of each relevant SM process. The multi-jet shape is taken from VR-E in the ABCD method and the normalization is determined by the transfer factor $T$ and rescaled by a correction factor determined by the fit. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties in the sum of the SM backgrounds shown. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines.

The $E_{T}^{miss}$ post-fit distributions in the multi-jet background validation region VR-F (highMass). The stacked histograms show the contribution of each relevant SM process. The multi-jet shape is taken from VR-E in the ABCD method and the normalization is determined by the transfer factor $T$ and rescaled by a correction factor determined by the fit. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties in the sum of the SM backgrounds shown. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines.

The $E_{T}^{miss}$ post-fit distributions in the multi-jet background validation region VR-F (highMass). The stacked histograms show the contribution of each relevant SM process. The multi-jet shape is taken from VR-E in the ABCD method and the normalization is determined by the transfer factor $T$ and rescaled by a correction factor determined by the fit. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties in the sum of the SM backgrounds shown. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines.

The pre-fit $m_{T2}$ distribution in the $WCR$. The SM backgrounds other than multi-jet production are estimated from MC simulation. The multi-jet contribution is estimated from data using the OS--SS method. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines.

The pre-fit $m_{T2}$ distribution in the $WCR$. The SM backgrounds other than multi-jet production are estimated from MC simulation. The multi-jet contribution is estimated from data using the OS--SS method. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines.

The post-fit yields in the $WVR$, $TVRs$, $ZVRs$ and $VVVRs$. The SM backgrounds other than multi-jet production are estimated from MC simulation. The multi-jet contribution is negligible and is estimated from data using the ABCD method, using CRs obtained with the same technique used for the SRs. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The lower panels show the ratio of data to the SM background estimate.

The post-fit yields in the $WVR$, $TVRs$, $ZVRs$ and $VVVRs$. The SM backgrounds other than multi-jet production are estimated from MC simulation. The multi-jet contribution is negligible and is estimated from data using the ABCD method, using CRs obtained with the same technique used for the SRs. The hatched bands represent the combined statistical and systematic uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distributions of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The lower panels show the ratio of data to the SM background estimate.

$\langle n_{ch} \rangle$, central jet.

$\langle \zeta \rangle$, forward jet.

$\langle \zeta \rangle$, forward jet.

$\langle \zeta \rangle$, central jet.

$\langle \zeta \rangle$, central jet.

$\langle p_{T}^{rel} / GeV \rangle$, forward jet.

$\langle p_{T}^{rel} / GeV \rangle$, forward jet.

$\langle p_{T}^{rel} / GeV \rangle$, central jet.

$\langle p_{T}^{rel} / GeV \rangle$, central jet.

$\langle r \rangle$, forward jet.

$\langle r \rangle$, forward jet.

$\langle r \rangle$, central jet.

$\langle r \rangle$, central jet.

$\langle n_{ch} \rangle$, both jets.

$\langle n_{ch} \rangle$, both jets.

$\langle \zeta \rangle$, combined jet.

$\langle \zeta \rangle$, combined jet.

$\langle p_{T}^{rel} / GeV \rangle$, both jets.

$\langle p_{T}^{rel} / GeV \rangle$, both jets.

$\langle r \rangle$, both jets.

$\langle r \rangle$, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, both jets.

$r$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, both jets.

$\zeta$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, both jets.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, both jets.

$n_{ch}$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more forward jet.

$r$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more forward jet.

$\zeta$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more forward jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more forward jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more central jet.

$n_{ch}$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more central jet.

$r$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more central jet.

$\zeta$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 100 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 200 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 300 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 300 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 400 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 500 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 500 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 600 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 700 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 700 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 800 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 800 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 900 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 900 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1000 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1200 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1200 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1400 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1400 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 1600 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 1600 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2000 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more central jet.

$p_{T}^{rel} / GeV$ , 2000 GeV < Jet p_{T} < 2500 GeV, more central jet.

The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the average number of tracks per jet $p_T$ bin. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.

The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the average fragmentation function per jet $p_T$ bin. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.

The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the average relative $p_T$ per jet $p_T$ bin. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.

The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the average r per jet $p_T$ bin. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.

The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the number of tracks. The first half of the bins on a given axis correspond to the more central jet while the second half correspond to the more forward jet. See Fig. 4 in the paper for more information about the binning. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.

The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the fragmentation function. The first half of the bins on a given axis correspond to the more central jet while the second half correspond to the more forward jet. See Fig. 4 in the paper for more information about the binning. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.

The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the relative $p_T$. The first half of the bins on a given axis correspond to the more central jet while the second half correspond to the more forward jet. See Fig. 4 in the paper for more information about the binning. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.

The total uncertainty covariance matrix for the r. The first half of the bins on a given axis correspond to the more central jet while the second half correspond to the more forward jet. See Fig. 4 in the paper for more information about the binning. The covariance matrix is the sum of the covariance matrices for each source of systematic and statistical uncertainty. Note that the overall sign for the systematic uncertainty covariances is arbitrary.

The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ vs. $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Limits are shown in the case of a higgsino LSP. The results are constrained by the kinematic limits of the top-squark decay into a chargino and a bottom quark (upper diagonal line) and into a neutralino and a top quark (lower diagonal line), respectively.

The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ vs. $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Limits are shown in the case of a higgsino LSP. The results are constrained by the kinematic limits of the top-squark decay into a chargino and a bottom quark (upper diagonal line) and into a neutralino and a top quark (lower diagonal line), respectively.

The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ vs. $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Limits are shown for the region $m_{\tilde{t}} - m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_{1,2}, \tilde{\chi}^\pm_{1}} \geq m_\text{top}$ where $B(\tilde{t} \rightarrow b \chi^{+}_{1}) = B(\tilde{t} \rightarrow t \chi^{0}_{1,2}) = 0.5$.

The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ vs. $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Limits are shown for the region $m_{\tilde{t}} - m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_{1,2}, \tilde{\chi}^\pm_{1}} \geq m_\text{top}$ where $B(\tilde{t} \rightarrow b \chi^{+}_{1}) = B(\tilde{t} \rightarrow t \chi^{0}_{1,2}) = 0.5$.

Observed model-dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1})$ signal grid. Limits are shown for $B(\tilde{t} \rightarrow b \chi^{+}_{1})$ equal to unity.

Observed model-dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} / \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2})$ signal grid. Limits are shown in the case of a higgsino LSP. The results are constrained by the kinematic limits of the top-squark decay into a chargino and a bottom quark (upper diagonal line) and into a neutralino and a top quark (lower diagonal line), respectively.

Expected model-dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1})$ signal grid. Limits are shown for $B(\tilde{t} \rightarrow b \chi^{+}_{1})$ equal to unity.

Expected model-dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} / \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2})$ signal grid. Limits are shown in the case of a higgsino LSP. The results are constrained by the kinematic limits of the top-squark decay into a chargino and a bottom quark (upper diagonal line) and into a neutralino and a top quark (lower diagonal line), respectively.

Expected background and observed number of events in different jet and $b$-tag multiplicity bins.

Cut flow for a model of top-squark pair production with the top squark decaying to a $b$-quark and a chargino. The chargino decays through the non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda^{''}_{323}$ via a virtual top squark to $bbs$ quark triplets ($m_{\tilde{t}}$ = 800 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}}$ = 750 GeV). The multijet trigger consists of four jets satisfying $p_{\text{T}}\geq(100)120$ GeV for the 2015-2016 (2017-2018) data period. Selections with negligible inefficiencies on the given sample, such as data quality requirements, are not displayed. The numbers in $N_{\text{weighted}}$ are normalized by the integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal efficiency for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is reported in %.

Signal efficiency for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is reported in %.

Signal efficiency for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is reported in %.

Signal efficiency for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is reported in %.

Signal efficiency for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is reported in %.

Signal efficiency for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is reported in %.

Signal efficiency for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is reported in %.

Signal efficiency for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is reported in %.

Signal efficiency for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance for $\tilde{t} \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2}(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1,2} \rightarrow tbs) / b\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1}(\tilde{\chi}^{+}_{1} \rightarrow \bar{b}\bar{b}\bar{s}) $ and c.c. model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is reported in %.

Observed $m_{t\bar{t}}^{reco}$ distributions in data for SR$2b$, shown together with the result of the fit with the three-shape-parameter function. The error bars indicate the effect of the fit parameter uncertainty on the background prediction. The bin width of the distributions is chosen to be the same as that used in the background parameterization.

Observed and expected upper limits on the cross-section times branching fraction of the $Z'_{TC2} \rightarrow t\bar{t}$ as a function of the $Z'_{TC2}$ mass ($\Gamma/m = 1.2$%).

Fit parameter values obtained from fits to data in the two signal regions. The fit function is $f(x) = p_{0} (1-x)^{p_{1}} x^{p_{2} + p_{3} \log(x)}$, where $x = m^{reco}_{t\bar{t}}/\sqrt{s}$.

Distributions in SR-low of the data and post-fit background prediction for p_T^soft/(p_T^soft + m_eff^3&#8467;). The SR-low event selections are applied for each distribution except for the variable shown, where the selection is indicated by a red arrow. The normalization factor for the WZ background is derived from the background-only estimation described in Section 7. The expected distribution for a benchmark signal model is included for comparison. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). The "Top-quark like" category contains the tt&#772;, Wt, and WW processes while the "Others" category contains backgrounds from triboson production and processes that include a Higgs boson, 3 or more tops, and tops produced in association with W or Z bosons. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the post-fit background prediction. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.

Distributions in SR-ISR of the data and post-fit background prediction for m_T. The SR-ISR event selections are applied for each distribution except for the variable shown, where the selection is indicated by a red arrow. The normalization factor for the WZ background is derived from the background-only estimation described in Section 7. The expected distribution for a benchmark signal model is included for comparison. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). The "Top-quark like" category contains the tt&#772;, Wt, and WW processes while the "Others" category contains backgrounds from triboson production and processes that include a Higgs boson, 3 or more tops, and tops produced in association with W or Z bosons. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the post-fit background prediction. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.

Distributions in SR-ISR of the data and post-fit background prediction for R(E_T^miss,jets). The SR-ISR event selections are applied for each distribution except for the variable shown, where the selection is indicated by a red arrow. The normalization factor for the WZ background is derived from the background-only estimation described in Section 7. The expected distribution for a benchmark signal model is included for comparison. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). The "Top-quark like" category contains the tt&#772;, Wt, and WW processes while the "Others" category contains backgrounds from triboson production and processes that include a Higgs boson, 3 or more tops, and tops produced in association with W or Z bosons. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the post-fit background prediction. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.

Distributions in SR-ISR of the data and post-fit background prediction for p_T^soft. The SR-ISR event selections are applied for each distribution except for the variable shown, where the selection is indicated by a red arrow. The normalization factor for the WZ background is derived from the background-only estimation described in Section 7. The expected distribution for a benchmark signal model is included for comparison. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). The "Top-quark like" category contains the tt&#772;, Wt, and WW processes while the "Others" category contains backgrounds from triboson production and processes that include a Higgs boson, 3 or more tops, and tops produced in association with W or Z bosons. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the post-fit background prediction. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.

Distributions in SR-ISR of the data and post-fit background prediction for p_T^jets. The SR-ISR event selections are applied for each distribution except for the variable shown, where the selection is indicated by a red arrow. The normalization factor for the WZ background is derived from the background-only estimation described in Section 7. The expected distribution for a benchmark signal model is included for comparison. The first (last) bin includes underflow (overflow). The "Top-quark like" category contains the tt&#772;, Wt, and WW processes while the "Others" category contains backgrounds from triboson production and processes that include a Higgs boson, 3 or more tops, and tops produced in association with W or Z bosons. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the post-fit background prediction. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.

Observed exclusion contour on C1N2 production assuming on-shell $W/Z$ decays as a function of the C1/N2 and N1 masses, and derived from the combined fit of low-mass and ISR regions.

Expected exclusion contour on C1N2 production assuming on-shell $W/Z$ decays as a function of the C1/N2 and N1 masses, and derived from the combined fit of low-mass and ISR regions.

Plus 1$\sigma$ uncertainty, varying the signal cross section within its uncertainty, on the observed exclusion contour on C1N2 production assuming on-shell $W/Z$ decays as a function of the C1/N2 and N1 masses, and derived from the combined fit of low-mass and ISR regions.

Minus 1$\sigma$ uncertainty, varying the signal cross section within its uncertainty, on the observed exclusion contour on C1N2 production assuming on-shell $W/Z$ decays as a function of the C1/N2 and N1 masses, and derived from the combined fit of low-mass and ISR regions.

Plus 1$\sigma$ uncertainty, due to uncertainties in the background prediction and experimental uncertainties affecting the signal, on the expected exclusion contour on C1N2 production assuming on-shell $W/Z$ decays as a function of the C1/N2 and N1 masses, and derived from the combined fit of low-mass and ISR regions.

Minus 1$\sigma$ uncertainty, due to uncertainties in the background prediction and experimental uncertainties affecting the signal, on the expected exclusion contour on C1N2 production assuming on-shell $W/Z$ decays as a function of the C1/N2 and N1 masses, and derived from the combined fit of low-mass and ISR regions.

Upper limits on observed wino-bino simplified model signal cross section $\sigma_\text{obs}^\text{95}$.

Upper limits on expected wino-bino simplified model signal cross section $\sigma_\text{exp}^\text{95}$.

Signal acceptance in SR-low, for signals with $m(\widetilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}) - m\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} \geq 100$ GeV.

Signal efficiency in SR-low, for signals with $m(\widetilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}) - m\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} \geq 100$ GeV.

Signal acceptance in SR-ISR, for signals with $m(\widetilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}) - m\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} \geq 100$ GeV.

Signal efficiency in SR-ISR, for signals with $m(\widetilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}) - m\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} \geq 100$ GeV.

Signal acceptance in SR-low, for signals with $m(\widetilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}) - m\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} < 100$ GeV.

Signal efficiency in SR-low, for signals with $m(\widetilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}) - m\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} < 100$ GeV.

Signal acceptance in SR-ISR, for signals with $m(\widetilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}) - m\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} < 100$ GeV.

Signal efficiency in SR-ISR, for signals with $m(\widetilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}) - m\widetilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} < 100$ GeV.

The observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in the SRs. The normalization factors of the $WZ$ sample for the low-mass and ISR regions are different and are treated separately in the combined fit. \The "Top-quark like" category contains the tt&#772;, Wt, and WW processes while the "Others" category contains backgrounds from triboson production and processes that include a Higgs boson, 3 or more tops, and tops produced in association with W or Z bosons. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented. The individual uncertainties can be correlated and do not necessarily add in quadrature to equal the total background uncertainty.

Summary of the expected background and data yields in $\text{SR-low}$ and $\text{SR-ISR}$. The second and third columns show the data and total expected background with systematic uncertainties. The fourth column gives the model-independent upper limits at 95\% CL on the visible cross section ($\sigma_\text{vis}$). The fifth and sixth columns give the visible number of observed ($S^{95}_\text{obs}$) and expected ($S^{95}_\text{exp}$) events of a generic beyond-the-SM process, where uncertainties on $S^{95}_\text{exp}$ reflect the $\pm 1 \sigma$ uncertainties on the background estimation. The last column shows the discovery $p$-value and Gaussian significance $Z$ assuming no signal.

Upper limits on observed (expected) wino-bino simplified model signal cross section $\sigma_\text{obs(exp)}^\text{95}$.

Full list of event selections and MC generator-weighted yields and in $\text{SR-ISR}$ for the main $WZ$ background and a representative $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ signal point of mass 200 GeV and mass splitting $\Delta m = 100$ GeV normalized to 139 fb$^{-1}$. 40000 events were generated.

Full list of event selections and MC generator-weighted yields and in $\text{SR-low}$ for the main $WZ$ background and a representative $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ signal point of mass 200 GeV and mass splitting $\Delta m = 100$ GeV normalized to 139 fb$^{-1}$. 40000 events were generated.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct higgsino production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct higgsino production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct higgsino production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct higgsino production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct higgsino production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})<0$.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})<0$.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})<0$.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})<0$.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})<0$.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})<0$.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})<0$.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})<0$.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})>0$.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})>0$.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})>0$.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})>0$.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})>0$.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})>0$.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})>0$.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})>0$.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of VBF wino-bino production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of VBF wino-bino production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of VBF wino-bino production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of VBF wino-bino production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct wino-bino production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct slepton production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct slepton production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct slepton production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct slepton production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct slepton production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct slepton production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct slepton production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct slepton production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH smuon production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH smuon production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct smuon production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct smuon production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH smuon production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH smuon production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct smuon production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct smuon production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH smuon production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH smuon production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct selectron production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct selectron production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH smuon production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH smuon production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct selectron production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct selectron production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH selectron production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH selectron production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH slepton production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH slepton production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH selectron production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH selectron production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH slepton production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH slepton production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH selectron production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH selectron production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH slepton production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH slepton production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH selectron production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH selectron production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH slepton production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH slepton production.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH smuon production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH smuon production.

Efficiency for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH smuon production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH smuon production.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH smuon production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH smuon production.

Efficiency for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH smuon production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH smuon production.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH selectron production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH selectron production.

Efficiency for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH selectron production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct LH selectron production.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH selectron production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH selectron production.

Efficiency for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH selectron production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct RH selectron production.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-3}$) for the slepton process in the SR-S region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-3}$) for the slepton process in the SR-S region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the slepton process in the SR-S region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Efficiency for the slepton process in the SR-S region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-3}$) for the slepton process in the SR-S-high region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-3}$) for the slepton process in the SR-S-high region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the slepton process in the SR-S-high region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Efficiency for the slepton process in the SR-S-high region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-3}$) for the slepton process in the SR-S-low region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-3}$) for the slepton process in the SR-S-low region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the slepton process in the SR-S-low region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Efficiency for the slepton process in the SR-S-low region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-med region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m higgsino process in the SR-E-1l1T region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [0.5,60] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-3}$) for the slepton process in the SR-S region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-3}$) for the slepton process in the SR-S region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the slepton process in the SR-S region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Efficiency for the slepton process in the SR-S region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-3}$) for the slepton process in the SR-S-high region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-3}$) for the slepton process in the SR-S-high region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the slepton process in the SR-S-high region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Efficiency for the slepton process in the SR-S-high region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-3}$) for the slepton process in the SR-S-low region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-3}$) for the slepton process in the SR-S-low region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the slepton process in the SR-S-low region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Efficiency for the slepton process in the SR-S-low region. Truth stransverse mass is constrained to be within the range [100,140] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the C1C1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2N1 VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for wino-bino scenarios, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})>0$.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for wino-bino scenarios, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})>0$.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for wino-bino scenarios, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})<0$.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for wino-bino scenarios, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})<0$.

Efficiency for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1p VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for higgsino scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for higgsino scenarios.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for higgsino scenarios, assuming VBF production..

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for higgsino scenarios, assuming VBF production..

Efficiency for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-high region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct slepton scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct slepton scenarios.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct LH slepton scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct LH slepton scenarios.

Efficiency for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF-low region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct RH slepton scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct RH slepton scenarios.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Acceptance (note the $z$-axis is in units of $10^{-4}$) for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct smuon scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct smuon scenarios.

Efficiency for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Efficiency for the N2C1m VBF higgsino process in the SR-VBF region. Truth dilepton invariant mass is constrained to be within the range [1,40] GeV.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct LH smuon scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct LH smuon scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for wino-bino scenarios, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})>0$.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for wino-bino scenarios, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})>0$.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct RH smuon scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct RH smuon scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for wino-bino scenarios, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})<0$.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for wino-bino scenarios, assuming $m(\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}) \times m(\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0})<0$.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct selectron scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct selectron scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for higgsino scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for higgsino scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct LH selectron scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct LH selectron scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for higgsino scenarios, assuming VBF production..

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for higgsino scenarios, assuming VBF production..

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct RH selectron scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct RH selectron scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct slepton scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct slepton scenarios.

Number of signal events in SR-E-1L1T for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (155 GeV, 150 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-E-1L1T for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (155 GeV, 150 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct LH slepton scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct LH slepton scenarios.

Number of signal events in SR-E-high for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (155 GeV, 150 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-E-high for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (155 GeV, 150 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct RH slepton scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct RH slepton scenarios.

Number of signal events in SR-E-low for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (155 GeV, 150 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-E-low for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (155 GeV, 150 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct smuon scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct smuon scenarios.

Number of signal events in SR-E-med for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (155 GeV, 150 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-E-med for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (155 GeV, 150 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct LH smuon scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct LH smuon scenarios.

Number of signal events in SR-S-high for the (m($\tilde{\ell}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (150 GeV, 140 GeV) Slepton signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-S-high for the (m($\tilde{\ell}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (150 GeV, 140 GeV) Slepton signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct RH smuon scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct RH smuon scenarios.

Number of signal events in SR-S-low for the (m($\tilde{\ell}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (150 GeV, 140 GeV) Slepton signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-S-low for the (m($\tilde{\ell}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (150 GeV, 140 GeV) Slepton signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct selectron scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct selectron scenarios.

Number of signal events in SR-VBF for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (100 GeV, 95 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-VBF for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (100 GeV, 95 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct LH selectron scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct LH selectron scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct RH selectron scenarios.

Observed and Expected upper cross-section limits for direct RH selectron scenarios.

Number of signal events in SR-E-1L1T for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (155 GeV, 150 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-E-1L1T for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (155 GeV, 150 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-E-high for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (155 GeV, 150 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-E-high for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (155 GeV, 150 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-E-low for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (155 GeV, 150 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-E-low for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (155 GeV, 150 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-E-med for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (155 GeV, 150 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-E-med for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (155 GeV, 150 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-S-high for the (m($\tilde{\ell}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (150 GeV, 140 GeV) Slepton signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-S-high for the (m($\tilde{\ell}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (150 GeV, 140 GeV) Slepton signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-S-low for the (m($\tilde{\ell}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (150 GeV, 140 GeV) Slepton signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-S-low for the (m($\tilde{\ell}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (150 GeV, 140 GeV) Slepton signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-VBF for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (100 GeV, 95 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.

Number of signal events in SR-VBF for the (m($\tilde{\chi}_{2}^{0}$),m($\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$)) = (100 GeV, 95 GeV) Higgsino signal model at different stages of selection before and after weighting events to correspond to 140/fb.