The 95% CL upper limits on the branching fraction $\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H \to SS})$ with $\mathrm{S}\to\tau\tau$ decay, for different LLP masses $m_{\mathrm{S}}$ and proper decay lengths $c\tau_{0}$.

The 95% CL limits on the LLP mass $m_{\mathrm{S}}$ for different proper decay lengths $c\tau_{0}$ assuming a branching fraction of 1% for the $\mathrm{H \to SS}$ decay, and with subsequent $\mathrm{S \to b\overline{b}}$ decay.

The 95% CL limits on the LLP mass $m_{\mathrm{S}}$ for different proper decay lengths $c\tau_{0}$ assuming a branching fraction of 1% for the $\mathrm{H \to SS}$ decay, and with subsequent $\mathrm{S \to d \overline{d}}$ decay.

The 95% CL limits on the dark-sector top quark partner mass $m_{T}$ for different hidden glueball masses $m_{0}$ in the fraternal twin Higgs model.

The 95% CL limits on the dark-sector top quark partner mass $m_{T}$ for different hidden glueball masses $m_{0}$ in the folded SUSY model.

Observed and theoretical cross sections. In the observed, the first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the systematic, and the third the luminosity. In the theoretical, the first uncertainty is due to scale variations, the second due to the choice of PDF. The theoretical cross section has been computed at approximate third-order in QCD, with the addition of third-order corrections of soft gluon emission terms, assuming a top quark mass of 172.5 GeV and using the PDF4LHC21 PDF set.

The number of estimated signal and background events after the fit in the 1j1b, 2j1b, and 2j2b regions compared to the observed number of events. The total uncertainties in the estimated events after the fit are given.

Normalised fiducial differential tW production cross section as a function of the $Leading$ $lepton$ $p_{T}$. The horizontal bars on the points show the bin width. Predictions from POWHEG (PH) DR and DS + PYTHIA 8 (P8), POWHEG DR + HERWIG 7 (H7), MADGRAPH5_aMC@NLO (aMC) DR, DR2, DS and DS with a dynamic factor + PYTHIA 8 are also shown. The grey band represents the statistical uncertainty and the yellow band the total uncertainty. In the lower panels, the ratio of the predictions to the data is shown.

Normalised fiducial differential tW production cross section as a function of the $p_{Z}(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j)$. The horizontal bars on the points show the bin width. Predictions from POWHEG (PH) DR and DS + PYTHIA 8 (P8), POWHEG DR + HERWIG 7 (H7), MADGRAPH5_aMC@NLO (aMC) DR, DR2, DS and DS with a dynamic factor + PYTHIA 8 are also shown. The grey band represents the statistical uncertainty and the yellow band the total uncertainty. In the lower panels, the ratio of the predictions to the data is shown.

Normalised fiducial differential tW production cross section as a function of the $Jet$ $p_{T}$. The horizontal bars on the points show the bin width. Predictions from POWHEG (PH) DR and DS + PYTHIA 8 (P8), POWHEG DR + HERWIG 7 (H7), MADGRAPH5_aMC@NLO (aMC) DR, DR2, DS and DS with a dynamic factor + PYTHIA 8 are also shown. The grey band represents the statistical uncertainty and the yellow band the total uncertainty. In the lower panels, the ratio of the predictions to the data is shown.

Normalised fiducial differential tW production cross section as a function of the $m(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j)$. The horizontal bars on the points show the bin width. Predictions from POWHEG (PH) DR and DS + PYTHIA 8 (P8), POWHEG DR + HERWIG 7 (H7), MADGRAPH5_aMC@NLO (aMC) DR, DR2, DS and DS with a dynamic factor + PYTHIA 8 are also shown. The grey band represents the statistical uncertainty and the yellow band the total uncertainty. In the lower panels, the ratio of the predictions to the data is shown.

Normalised fiducial differential tW production cross section as a function of the $\Delta\phi(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm})/\pi$. The horizontal bars on the points show the bin width. Predictions from POWHEG (PH) DR and DS + PYTHIA 8 (P8), POWHEG DR + HERWIG 7 (H7), MADGRAPH5_aMC@NLO (aMC) DR, DR2, DS and DS with a dynamic factor + PYTHIA 8 are also shown. The grey band represents the statistical uncertainty and the yellow band the total uncertainty. In the lower panels, the ratio of the predictions to the data is shown.

Normalised fiducial differential tW production cross section as a function of the $m_{T}(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j, p_{T}^{miss})$. The horizontal bars on the points show the bin width. Predictions from POWHEG (PH) DR and DS + PYTHIA 8 (P8), POWHEG DR + HERWIG 7 (H7), MADGRAPH5_aMC@NLO (aMC) DR, DR2, DS and DS with a dynamic factor + PYTHIA 8 are also shown. The grey band represents the statistical uncertainty and the yellow band the total uncertainty. In the lower panels, the ratio of the predictions to the data is shown.

The p-values from the goodness-of-fit tests comparing the six differential cross section measurements with the predictions from POWHEG (PH) DR and DS + PYTHIA 8 (P8), POWHEG DR + HERWIG 7 (H7), MADGRAPH5 aMC@NLO (aMC) DR, DR2, DS, and DS with a dynamic factor + PYTHIA 8. The complete covariance matrix from the results and the statistical uncertainties in the predictions are taken into account.

Distribution of the RF output for events in the 1j1b region. The number of observed events (points) and estimated signal and background events (filled histograms) before the maximum likelihood fit are shown. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainty in the data, and the hatched band the total uncertainty in the estimated events before the fit. The lower panels display the ratio of the data to the sum of the estimated events (points) before the fit, with the bands giving the corresponding uncertainties.

Distribution of the RF output for events in the 2j1b region. The number of observed events (points) and estimated signal and background events (filled histograms) before the maximum likelihood fit are shown. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainty in the data, and the hatched band the total uncertainty in the estimated events before the fit. The lower panels display the ratio of the data to the sum of the estimated events (points) before the fit, with the bands giving the corresponding uncertainties.

Distribution of the Subleading jet $p_{T}$ for events in the 2j2b region. The number of observed events (points) and estimated signal and background events (filled histograms) before the maximum likelihood fit are shown. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainty in the data, and the hatched band the total uncertainty in the estimated events before the fit. The lower panels display the ratio of the data to the sum of the estimated events (points) before the fit, with the bands giving the corresponding uncertainties.

Response matrix between detector and particle level for the $Leading$ $lepton$ $p_{T}$.

Response matrix between detector and particle level for the $p_{Z}(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j)$.

Response matrix between detector and particle level for the $Jet$ $p_{T}$.

Response matrix between detector and particle level for the $m(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j)$.

Response matrix between detector and particle level for the $\Delta\phi(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm})/\pi$.

Response matrix between detector and particle level for the $m_{T}(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j, p_{T}^{miss})$.

Covariance matrix including all uncertainties of the normalised differential cross section in bins of $Leading$ $lepton$ $p_{T}$ in units of $1/GeV^{2}$.

Covariance matrix including all uncertainties of the normalised differential cross section in bins of $p_{Z}(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j)$ in units of $1/GeV^{2}$.

Covariance matrix including all uncertainties of the normalised differential cross section in bins of $Jet$ $p_{T}$ in units of $1/GeV^{2}$.

Covariance matrix including all uncertainties of the normalised differential cross section in bins of $m(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j)$ in units of $1/GeV^{2}$.

Covariance matrix including all uncertainties of the normalised differential cross section in bins of $\Delta\phi(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm})/\pi$ in units of 1.

Covariance matrix including all uncertainties of the normalised differential cross section in bins of $m_{T}(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j, p_{T}^{miss})$ in units of $1/GeV^{2}$.

The measured $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ differential cross-sections in the $2\mu+\text{jets}$ region of the incluse jet phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ differential cross-sections in the $2e+\text{jets}$ region of the incluse jet phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ in the inclusive jet phase space for $1\mu+\text{jets}$. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ in the inclusive jet phase space for $1e+\text{jets}$. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ in the inclusive jet phase space for $2\mu+\text{jets}$. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ in the inclusive jet phase space for $2e+\text{jets}$. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ differential cross-sections in the $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase spaces, compared with the SM predictions. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ differential cross-sections in the $1\mu+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ differential cross-sections in the $1e+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ differential cross-sections in the $2\mu+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ differential cross-sections in the $2e+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ in the VBF phase space for $1\mu+\text{jets}$. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ in the VBF phase space for $1e+\text{jets}$. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ in the VBF phase space for $2\mu+\text{jets}$. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ in the VBF phase space for $2e+\text{jets}$. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $m_{jj}$ distribution in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions, for the $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $m_{jj}$ distribution in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions, for the $1\mu+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $m_{jj}$ distribution in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions, for the $1e+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $m_{jj}$ distribution in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions, for the $2\mu+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $m_{jj}$ distribution in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions, for the $2e+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $m_{jj}$ in the $1\mu+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $m_{jj}$ in the $e+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $m_{jj}$ in the $2\mu+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $m_{jj}$ in the $2e+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ distributions in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions for the $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ distributions in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions for the $1\mu+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ distributions in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions for the $1e+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ distributions in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions for the $2\mu+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ distributions in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions for the $2e+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ in the $1\mu+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ in the $1e+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ in the $2\mu+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ in the $2e+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured Z → νν cross-section, differential in p_T^Z in the (a) single jet and (b) VBF phase spaces, and differential in (c) m_jj and (d) Δφ_jj in the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red hatched band).

The measured Z → νν cross-section, differential in p_T^Z in the (a) single jet and (b) VBF phase spaces, and differential in (c) m_jj and (d) Δφ_jj in the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red hatched band).

The measured Z → νν cross-section, differential in p_T^Z in the (a) single jet and (b) VBF phase spaces, and differential in (c) m_jj and (d) Δφ_jj in the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red hatched band).

The measured Z → νν cross-section, differential in p_T^Z in the (a) single jet and (b) VBF phase spaces, and differential in (c) m_jj and (d) Δφ_jj in the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red hatched band).

The measured p_T^Z, p_T^W and p_T^γ differential cross-sections in the inclusive jet phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) γ+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2μ+jets,(e) e+jets and (f) μ+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured p_T^Z, p_T^W and p_T^γ differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) γ+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2μ+jets, (e) e+jets and (f) μ+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured m_jj differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) γ+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2μ+jets, (e) e+jets and (f) μ+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured Δφ_jj differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets (b) γ+jets (c) 2e+jets (d) 2μ+jets (e) e+jets and (f) μ+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured p_T^Z, p_T^W and p_T^γ differential cross-sections in the inclusive jet phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) γ+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2μ+jets,(e) e+jets and (f) μ+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured p_T^Z, p_T^W and p_T^γ differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) γ+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2μ+jets, (e) e+jets and (f) μ+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured m_jj differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) γ+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2μ+jets, (e) e+jets and (f) μ+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured Δφ_jj differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets (b) γ+jets (c) 2e+jets (d) 2μ+jets (e) e+jets and (f) μ+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured p_T^Z, p_T^W and p_T^γ differential cross-sections in the inclusive jet phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) γ+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2μ+jets,(e) e+jets and (f) μ+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured p_T^Z, p_T^W and p_T^γ differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) γ+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2μ+jets, (e) e+jets and (f) μ+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured m_jj differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) γ+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2μ+jets, (e) e+jets and (f) μ+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured Δφ_jj differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets (b) γ+jets (c) 2e+jets (d) 2μ+jets (e) e+jets and (f) μ+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured p_T^Z, p_T^W and p_T^γ differential cross-sections in the inclusive jet phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) γ+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2μ+jets,(e) e+jets and (f) μ+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured p_T^Z, p_T^W and p_T^γ differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) γ+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2μ+jets, (e) e+jets and (f) μ+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured m_jj differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) γ+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2μ+jets, (e) e+jets and (f) μ+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured Δφ_jj differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets (b) γ+jets (c) 2e+jets (d) 2μ+jets (e) e+jets and (f) μ+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured γ+jets cross-section, differential in p_T^γ in the (a) single jet and (b) VBF phase spaces, and differential in (c) m_jj and (d) Δφ_jj in the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red hatched band).

The measured γ+jets cross-section, differential in p_T^γ in the (a) single jet and (b) VBF phase spaces, and differential in (c) m_jj and (d) Δφ_jj in the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red hatched band).

The measured γ+jets cross-section, differential in p_T^γ in the (a) single jet and (b) VBF phase spaces, and differential in (c) m_jj and (d) Δφ_jj in the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red hatched band).

The measured γ+jets cross-section, differential in p_T^γ in the (a) single jet and (b) VBF phase spaces, and differential in (c) m_jj and (d) Δφ_jj in the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red hatched band).

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 7a

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 7b

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 8a

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 8b

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 8c

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 8d

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 9a

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 9b

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 9c

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 9d

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 3b of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 3c of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 3d of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 3e of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 5b of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 5c of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 5d of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 7b of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 7c of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 7d of Auxiliary Material

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 7a) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 7a).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 7a) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 7a) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9a).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 7a) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9b).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8c) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8c).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8c) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8c) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8c) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8a) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8a).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8a) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8a) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8a) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8d) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8d).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8d) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3e (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8d) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9c).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8d) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9d).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8b) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8b).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8b) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8b) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8b) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $1\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 2c (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $1\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 2c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 1e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 10a) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 1e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 10a).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $2\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 2d (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $2\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 2d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 2e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 10b) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 2e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 10b).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9a).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9b).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3d (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3d (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3d (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3b (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3b (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3b (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3e (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3e (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3e (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9c).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3e (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9d).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3c (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3c (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3c (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 4c (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 4c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 4a (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 4a (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 4d (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 4d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 4b (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 4b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9a) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9a).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9a) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9b).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5d (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5d (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5b (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5b (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9c) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9c).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9c) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9d).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5c (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5c (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 6c (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 6c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 6a (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 6a (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 10c) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 10c).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 6b (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 6b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9b) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9b).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7d (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9d) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9d).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7c (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 8c (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 8c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 8a (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 8a (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 10d) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 10d).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 8b (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 8b (aux)).

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\ell\ell+E_\text{T}^{\text{miss}}$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for Multilepton.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for combination.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}b\bar{b}$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\tau\tau$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\ell\ell+E_\text{T}^{\text{miss}}$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for Multilepton.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for combination.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the signal strength for the inclusive ggF HH production from the bb̄τ⁺τ^-, bb̄γγ, bb̄bb̄, multilepton and bb̄ℓℓ+E_T^miss decay channels, and their statistical combination. When deriving the limit on μ_ggF^HH (μ_VBF^HH), the VBF (ggF) HH production cross-section is fixed to the SM predicted value for m_H=125 GeV. The expected limit, along with the ±1σ and ±2σ bands, is calculated under the assumption of no HH process and with all NPs profiled to the observed data.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the signal strength for the VBF HH production from the bb̄τ⁺τ^-, bb̄γγ, bb̄bb̄, multilepton and bb̄ℓℓ+E_T^miss decay channels, and their statistical combination. When deriving the limit on μ_ggF^HH (μ_VBF^HH), the VBF (ggF) HH production cross-section is fixed to the SM predicted value for m_H=125 GeV. The expected limit, along with the ±1σ and ±2σ bands, is calculated under the assumption of no HH process and with all NPs profiled to the observed data.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the inclusive ggF and VBF HH production cross-section from the bb̄τ⁺τ^-, bb̄γγ, bb̄bb̄, multilepton and bb̄ℓℓ+E_T^miss decay channels, and their statistical combination. The Higgs boson mass is set to 125 GeV when deriving the predicted SM cross-section (red band). The expected limits, along with the ±1σ and ±2σ bands, are calculated under the assumption of no Higgs boson pair production and with all NPs profiled to the observed data.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for $b\bar{b}b\bar{b}$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\tau\tau$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\ell\ell+E_\text{T}^{\text{miss}}$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for Multilepton.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for combination.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}b\bar{b}$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\tau\tau$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\ell\ell+E_\text{T}^{\text{miss}}$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for Multilepton.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for combination.

Observed (solid lines) and expected (dashed lines) 95% CL exclusion limits on the HH production cross-sections of (a) the inclusive ggF and VBF processes as a function of κ_λ, for the bb̄γγ (purple), bb̄τ⁺τ^- (green), multilepton (cyan), bb̄bb̄ (blue) and bb̄ℓℓ+E_T^miss (brown) decay channels and their combination (black). The expected limits assume no HH production. The red line shows the theory prediction for the ggF and VBF HH production cross-section as a function of κ_λ. The bands surrounding the red cross-section lines indicate the theoretical uncertainties on the predicted cross-section.

Observed (solid lines) and expected (dashed lines) 95% CL exclusion limits on the HH production cross-sections of the VBF process as a function of κ_2V, for the bb̄γγ (purple), bb̄τ⁺τ^- (green), multilepton (cyan), bb̄bb̄ (blue) and bb̄ℓℓ+E_T^miss (brown) decay channels and their combination (black). The expected limits assume no VBF HH production. The ggF HH production cross-section is assumed to be as predicted by the SM. The ggF HH production cross-section is assumed to be as predicted by the SM. The red line shows the predicted VBF HH cross-section as a function of κ_2V. The bands surrounding the red cross-section lines indicate the theoretical uncertainties on the predicted cross-section.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}b\bar{b}$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\tau\tau$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ parameter for combination.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}b\bar{b}$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\tau\tau$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ parameter for combination.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}b\bar{b}$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\tau\tau$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ parameter for combination.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}b\bar{b}$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\tau\tau$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ parameter for combination.

Observed and expected 95% CL combined upper limits on the cross-section for the SM and seven BSM HEFT benchmarks (arXiv:2304.01968 [hep-ph]) in the ggF process, describing representative signal kinematics and m_HH shape features obtained by varying multiple HEFT coefficients. The expected limits from the bb̄τ⁺τ^-, bb̄γγ and bb̄bb̄ decay channels are presented as well. Theoretical predictions, estimated using specific sets of coefficient values defined in the benchmarks, are shown as red cross dots.

The model-independent 95\% \CL expected and observed upper limits set on ${\sigma(\PP\to 2\Pa+\PX)\mathcal{B}^2(\Pa\to 2\PGm)\alphaGen}$ over the range $0.21 < \MPa < 9\GeV$ for the combined 2016, 2017, and 2018 analyses. Mass ranges that overlap with \JPsi and \PgU resonances are excluded from the search

The 95\% \CL observed upper limits on the effective coupling $\CahLambda$ of the ALP to the SM Higgs assuming the branching fraction of the ALP to muons is 1 (blue) and 0.1 (orange), for both the expected (dashed) and observed (solid) limits

The 95\% \CL observed upper limits on the effective coupling $\cll/\Lambda$ of the ALP to the SM leptons. The orange shaded region represents the parameter space excluded by this search under three choices of $\CahLambda$ $1\TeV^{-2}$ (solid), $0.1\TeV^{-2}$ (dashed), and $0.01\TeV^{-2}$ (dotted)

The 95\% \CL observed upper limits on $\varepsilon^{2} \mathcal{B}(\ZDark \to \sDark \overline{\sDark}) \mathcal{B}^{2}(\sDark \rightarrow 2\PGm)$ for the vector portal model as a function of the dark scalar mass $\MsDark$ and dark vector boson mass $\MZDark$. The yellow and green bands indicate one and two standard deviation values of the limit, respectively. Because the model-independent limits are calculated only up to a dimuon mass of 60\GeV, the \sDark mass considered for these limits is below 60\GeV

The 95\% \CL observed upper limits for $\sigma(\PP\to\PhOneTwo\to 2\PaOne) \mathcal{B}^2(\PaOne\to 2\PGm)$ for the NMSSM as a function of $\MPaOne$ for $\MPhOneTwo$ = 90~GEV. The data presented here reflect the results of the 2017 and 2018 datasets combined with the previously published results of the 2016 dataset in \cite{CMS:2018jid}

The 95\% \CL observed upper limits for $\sigma(\PP\to\PhOneTwo\to 2\PaOne) \mathcal{B}^2(\PaOne\to 2\PGm)$ for the NMSSM as a function of $\MPaOne$ for $\MPhOneTwo$ = 125~GEV. The data presented here reflect the results of the 2017 and 2018 datasets combined with the previously published results of the 2016 dataset in \cite{CMS:2018jid}

The 95\% \CL observed upper limits for $\sigma(\PP\to\PhOneTwo\to 2\PaOne) \mathcal{B}^2(\PaOne\to 2\PGm)$ for the NMSSM as a function of $\MPaOne$ for $\MPhOneTwo$ = 150~GEV. The data presented here reflect the results of the 2017 and 2018 datasets combined with the previously published results of the 2016 dataset in \cite{CMS:2018jid}

The 95\% \CL observed upper limits (black solid curves) from this search as interpreted in the dark SUSY scenario for the process $\PP \to \Ph \to 2\nOne \to 2\gammaDark + 2\nDark \to 4\PGm + \PX$, with \mbox{$\MnOne = 60\GeV$} and $\MnDark = 1\GeV$. The limits are presented in the plane of $\varepsilon$ and $\MgammaDark$. The color gradient represents different branching fraction assumptions for \mbox{$\mathcal{B}(\Ph \to 2\nOne \to 2\gammaDark + 2\nDark)$}, ranging from dark orange (0.05\%) to light orange (10\%). The degradation of the limit around 1\GeV is attributed to the drop in the dimuon branching fraction $\mathcal{B}(\gammaDark \to 2\mu)$ due to the dimuon resonance of the $\phi$ meson~\cite{Batell:2009yf}

The expected upper $68\%$ exclusions for the nominal $\sigma$ cross section in the plane of $m_{\phi}$ and $T_D$, for various $m_S$ values, for the case $m_{A'}=1.0$ GeV ($A' \rightarrow \pi^+\pi^-$ with $\mathcal{BR}=100\%$).

The expected lower $68\%$ exclusions for the nominal $\sigma$ cross section in the plane of $m_{\phi}$ and $T_D$, for various $m_S$ values, for the case $m_{A'}=1.0$ GeV ($A' \rightarrow \pi^+\pi^-$ with $\mathcal{BR}=100\%$).

The $95\%$ CL observed upper limits on the cross section shown as a functions of $T_D$ and the pseudoscalar mass $m_{\phi}$ for $m_S = 300$ GeV, for the case $m_{A'}=1.0$ GeV ($A' \rightarrow \pi^+\pi^-$ with $\mathcal{BR}=100\%$).

The $95\%$ CL observed upper limits on the cross section shown as a functions of $T_D$ and the pseudoscalar mass $m_{\phi}$ for $m_S = 600$ GeV, for the case $m_{A'}=1.0$ GeV ($A' \rightarrow \pi^+\pi^-$ with $\mathcal{BR}=100\%$).

The $95\%$ CL observed upper limits on the cross section shown as a functions of $T_D$ and the pseudoscalar mass $m_{\phi}$ for $m_S = 1000$ GeV, for the case $m_{A'}=1.0$ GeV ($A' \rightarrow \pi^+\pi^-$ with $\mathcal{BR}=100\%$).

The observed exclusions for the nominal $\sigma$ cross section in the plane of $m_{\phi}$ and $T_D$, for various $m_S$ values, for the case $m_{A'} = 0.5$ GeV ($A' \rightarrow e^+e^-, \mu^+\mu^-, \pi^+\pi^-$ with $\mathcal{BR} = 40, 40, 20\%$).

The expected exclusions for the nominal $\sigma$ cross section in the plane of $m_{\phi}$ and $T_D$, for various $m_S$ values, for the case $m_{A'} = 0.5$ GeV ($A' \rightarrow e^+e^-, \mu^+\mu^-, \pi^+\pi^-$ with $\mathcal{BR} = 40, 40, 20\%$).

The expected upper $68\%$ exclusions for the nominal $\sigma$ cross section in the plane of $m_{\phi}$ and $T_D$, for various $m_S$ values, for the case $m_{A'} = 0.5$ GeV ($A' \rightarrow e^+e^-, \mu^+\mu^-, \pi^+\pi^-$ with $\mathcal{BR} = 40, 40, 20\%$).

The expected lower $68\%$ exclusions for the nominal $\sigma$ cross section in the plane of $m_{\phi}$ and $T_D$, for various $m_S$ values, for the case $m_{A'} = 0.5$ GeV ($A' \rightarrow e^+e^-, \mu^+\mu^-, \pi^+\pi^-$ with $\mathcal{BR} = 40, 40, 20\%$).

The observed exclusions for the nominal $\sigma$ cross section in the plane of $m_{\phi}$ and $T_D$, for various $m_S$ values, for the case $m_{A'} = 0.7$ GeV ($A' \rightarrow e^+e^-, \mu^+\mu^-, \pi^+\pi^-$ with $\mathcal{BR} = 15, 15, 70\%$).

The expected exclusions for the nominal $\sigma$ cross section in the plane of $m_{\phi}$ and $T_D$, for various $m_S$ values, for the case $m_{A'} = 0.7$ GeV ($A' \rightarrow e^+e^-, \mu^+\mu^-, \pi^+\pi^-$ with $\mathcal{BR} = 15, 15, 70\%$).

The expected upper $68\%$ exclusions for the nominal $\sigma$ cross section in the plane of $m_{\phi}$ and $T_D$, for various $m_S$ values, for the case $m_{A'} = 0.7$ GeV ($A' \rightarrow e^+e^-, \mu^+\mu^-, \pi^+\pi^-$ with $\mathcal{BR} = 15, 15, 70\%$).

The expected lower $68\%$ exclusions for the nominal $\sigma$ cross section in the plane of $m_{\phi}$ and $T_D$, for various $m_S$ values, for the case $m_{A'} = 0.7$ GeV ($A' \rightarrow e^+e^-, \mu^+\mu^-, \pi^+\pi^-$ with $\mathcal{BR} = 15, 15, 70\%$).

For a selection of signal samples in era 2018 with $m_{\phi} = T_D = 3$ GeV, the relative efficiencies and the total efficiency with respect to the selection on the generator-level $H_T$,$H^{gen}_T > 1000$ GeV.

The $95\%$ CL cross section limit for all values of $m_{A'}$, $T_D$, $m_{\phi}$, and $m_S$ used in the scan.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $W\phi($ee$)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $W\phi($ee$)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $W\phi($ee$)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $Z\phi($ee$)$ SR event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $Z\phi($ee$)$ SR event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $t\bar{t}\phi($ee$)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $t\bar{t}\phi($ee$)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $t\bar{t}\phi($ee$)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $t\bar{t}\phi($ee$)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $t\bar{t}\phi($ee$)$ SR3 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $t\bar{t}\phi($ee$)$ SR3 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $W\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $W\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $W\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $W\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $Z\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $Z\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $t\bar{t}\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $t\bar{t}\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $t\bar{t}\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $t\bar{t}\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the low mass $t\bar{t}\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR3 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the high mass $t\bar{t}\phi(\mu\mu)$ SR3 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $W\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $Z\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $W\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $Z\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $W\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR3 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $Z\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR3 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $t\bar{t}\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR1 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $t\bar{t}\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR2 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $t\bar{t}\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR3 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $t\bar{t}\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR4 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $t\bar{t}\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR5 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $t\bar{t}\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR6 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

Dilepton mass spectra for the $t\bar{t}\phi(\tau\tau)$ SR7 event selections for the combined 2016–2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected SM background prediction (Obs/Exp), and the gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the background prediction. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events in each distribution. The expected background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after the data is fit under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, two example signal hypotheses for the production and decay of a scalar and a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson are shown, and their masses (in units of GeV) are indicated in the legend. The signals are normalized to the product of the cross section and branching fraction of 10 fb.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the ee decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the ee decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the $\mu\mu$ decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the $\mu\mu$ decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the $\tau\tau$ decay scenario. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the $\tau\tau$ decay scenario. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the ee decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the ee decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the $\mu\mu$ decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the $\mu\mu$ decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the $\tau\tau$ decay scenario. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the $\tau\tau$ decay scenario. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with H-like production in the ee decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with H-like production in the ee decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with H-like production in the $\mu\mu$ decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with H-like production in the $\mu\mu$ decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal with H-like production in the $\tau\tau$ decay scenario. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $W\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal with H-like production in the $\tau\tau$ decay scenario. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $Z\phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the ee decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the ee decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the $\mu\mu$ decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the $\mu\mu$ decay scenario. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with scalar couplings in the $\tau\tau$ decay scenario. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings in the $\tau\tau$ decay scenario. The red line is the theoretical prediction for the product of the production cross section and branching fraction of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on $g^2_{tS}$ for the dilaton-like $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal model. Masses of the $\phi$ boson above 300 GeV are not probed for the dilaton-like signal model as the $\phi$ branching fraction into top quark-antiquark pairs becomes nonnegligible.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on $g^2_{tPS}$ for the axion-like $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal model. Masses of the $\phi$ boson above 300 GeV are not probed for the axion-like signal model as the $\phi$ branching fraction into top quark-antiquark pairs becomes nonnegligible.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and branching fraction for the H-like production of X$\phi \rightarrow$ ee. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and branching fraction for the H-like production of X$\phi \rightarrow \mu\mu$. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level upper limits on $sin^2 \theta$ for the H-like production and decay of X$\phi$ signal model.

Cross section in units of pb for the W$\phi$, Z$\phi$, and $t\bar{t}\phi$ signals as a function of the $\phi$ boson mass in GeV. All cross sections are inclusive of all W, Z, $t\bar{t}$ and $\phi$ decay modes.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $g^{2}_{tS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $g_{tS}$ denotes the coupling of the $\phi$ boson to the top quark and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $g^{2}_{tS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $g_{tS}$ denotes the coupling of the $\phi$ boson to the top quark and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $g^{2}_{tS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $g_{tS}$ denotes the coupling of the $\phi$ boson to the top quark and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $g^{2}_{tPS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $g_{tPS}$ denotes the coupling of the $\phi$ boson to the top quark and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $g^{2}_{tPS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $g_{tPS}$ denotes the coupling of the $\phi$ boson to the top quark and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $g^{2}_{tPS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $g_{tPS}$ denotes the coupling of the $\phi$ boson to the top quark and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{S}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{S}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{S}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{S}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{S}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{S}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{PS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{PS}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{PS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{PS}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{PS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{PS}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $W\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{S}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{S}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{S}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{S}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{S}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{S}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{PS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{PS}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{PS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{PS}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{PS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{PS}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $ee$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into an electron pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\mu\mu$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a muon pair. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis.

The 95% confidence level expected and observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ of the $Z\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow $$\tau\tau$$)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a tau pair.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\sigma$($t \bar{t} \phi$) and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $t \bar{t} \phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\sigma$ denotes the production cross section and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The red dash-dotted line is the theoretical prediction for $\sigma\bf{\it{B}}$ of the $t \bar{t} \phi$ signal. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\sigma$($t \bar{t} \phi$) and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $t \bar{t} \phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\sigma$ denotes the production cross section and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The red dash-dotted line is the theoretical prediction for $\sigma\bf{\it{B}}$ of the $t \bar{t} \phi$ signal. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\sigma$($W\phi$) and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $W\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\sigma$ denotes the production cross section and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The red dash-dotted line is the theoretical prediction for $\sigma\bf{\it{B}}$ of the $W\phi$ signal. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\sigma$($W\phi$) and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $W\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\sigma$ denotes the production cross section and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The red dash-dotted line is the theoretical prediction for $\sigma\bf{\it{B}}$ of the $W\phi$ signal. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\sigma$($W\phi$) and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $W\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\sigma$ denotes the production cross section and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The red dash-dotted line is the theoretical prediction for $\sigma\bf{\it{B}}$ of the $W\phi$ signal. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\sigma$($Z\phi$) and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $Z\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\sigma$ denotes the production cross section and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The red dash-dotted line is the theoretical prediction for $\sigma\bf{\it{B}}$ of the $Z\phi$ signal. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\sigma$($Z\phi$) and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $Z\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\sigma$ denotes the production cross section and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The red dash-dotted line is the theoretical prediction for $\sigma\bf{\it{B}}$ of the $Z\phi$ signal. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\sigma$($Z\phi$) and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $Z\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\sigma$ denotes the production cross section and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The red dash-dotted line is the theoretical prediction for $\sigma\bf{\it{B}}$ of the $Z\phi$ signal. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $g^{2}_{tS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $t \bar{t} \phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $g_{tS}$ denotes the coupling of the $\phi$ boson to the top quark and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $g^{2}_{tPS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $t \bar{t} \phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $g_{tPS}$ denotes the coupling of the $\phi$ boson to the top quark and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $t \bar{t} \phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{S}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $W\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{S}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{PS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $W\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{PS}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $W\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{S}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $Z\phi$ signal with scalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{S}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $\Lambda^{-2}_{PS}$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $Z\phi$ signal with pseudoscalar couplings, where $\Lambda_{PS}$ denotes the mass scale of the effective interaction and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The 95% confidence level observed upper limits on the product of $sin^2 \theta$ and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ for the $Z\phi$ signal with H-like production, where $\theta$ denotes the mixing angle of the Higgs boson with the $\phi$ boson and $\bf{\it{B}}(\phi \rightarrow \ell \ell)$ is the branching fraction of the $\phi$ boson into a lepton pair of given flavor. Exclusions on the dielectron, dimuon, and ditau decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson are shown with the green, blue, and orange solid lines, respectively. The vertical gray band indicates the mass region not considered in the analysis in the dielectron and dimuon decay scenarios of the $\phi$ boson.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal (with inclusive $t\bar{t}$ decay) in each signal region in the dielectron decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal (with inclusive $t\bar{t}$ decay) in each signal region in the dimuon decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal (with inclusive $t\bar{t}$ decay) in each signal region in the ditau decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal (with inclusive $t\bar{t}$ decay) in each signal region in the dielectron decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal (with inclusive $t\bar{t}$ decay) in each signal region in the dimuon decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $t\bar{t} \phi$ signal (with inclusive $t\bar{t}$ decay) in each signal region in the ditau decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the dielectron decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the dimuon decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the ditau decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the dielectron decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the dimuon decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the ditau decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for an H-like $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the dielectron decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for an H-like $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the dimuon decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for an H-like $\phi$ boson in the $W\phi$ signal (with leptonic $W$ decay) in each signal region in the ditau decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the dielectron decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the dimuon decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a scalar $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the ditau decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the dielectron decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the dimuon decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for a pseudoscalar $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the ditau decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for an H-like $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the dielectron decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for an H-like $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the dimuon decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

The product of acceptance and efficiency, $A\varepsilon$, for an H-like $\phi$ boson in the $Z\phi$ signal (with leptonic $Z$ decay) in each signal region in the ditau decay scenario. Each value is computed as the ratio of the number of simulated signal events passing all selection criteria to the total number of simulated signal events, and includes the data-to-simulation correction factors described in the paper.

Selected signal shapes of the $W\phi$(ee) signal for illustration purposes. All shape parametrizations for all coupling scenarios of the $X\phi$(ee) signal are provided in the SignalShapes_XPhiToEleEle.root file, and a README file with instructions is provided under Additional Resources.

Selected signal shapes of the $W\phi$$(\mu\mu)$ signal for illustration purposes. All shape parametrizations for all coupling scenarios of the $X\phi$$(\mu\mu)$ signal are provided in the SignalShapes_XPhiToMuMu.root file, and a README file with instructions is provided under Additional Resources.

Selected signal shapes of the $W\phi$$(\tau\tau)$ signal for illustration purposes. All shape parametrizations for all coupling scenarios of the $X\phi$$(\tau\tau)$ signal are provided in the SignalShapes_XPhiToTauTau.root file, and a README file with instructions is provided under Additional Resources.

Fit results for the region 2 of pair produced resolved three jet mass ($m_{jjj}$) distribution, after $H_{\rm T}>600$ GeV, $|\eta|<2.4$, sixth jet $p_{\rm T}>50$ GeV, $D^2_{[(6,3)+(3,2)]}<1.0$, $A_m <0.175$, $\Delta>180$ GeV, $D^2_{[3,2]}<0.175$

Fit results for the region 3 of pair produced resolved three jet mass ($m_{jjj}$) distribution, after $H_{\rm T}>600$ GeV, $|\eta|<2.4$, sixth jet $p_{\rm T}>100$ GeV, $D^2_{[(6,3)+(3,2)]}<0.9$, $A_m <0.15$, $\Delta>150$ GeV, $D^2_{[3,2]}<0.2$

Expected and observed upper limits on the signal strength for the pair produced merged trijets. Acceptance after the selection $p_{\rm T}>300$ GeV, $|\eta|<2.4$, and $\tau_{32,\mathrm{DDT}}<0$ on both leading and subleading jet and $A_m<0.15$ between the two leading jets.

Expected and observed upper limits on the signal strength for the pair produced merged dijets. Acceptance after the selection $p_{\rm T}>300$ GeV, $|\eta|<2.4$, and $N^1_{2,\mathrm{DDT}}<0$ on both leading and subleading jet and $A_m<0.15$ between the two leading jets.

Expected and observed upper limits on the signal strength for the pair produced resolved trijets (including overlaps). Acceptance for three regions search requions described in table 1 of the paper.

Nuclear modification factor $R_{p\mathrm{Pb}}$ for prompt $D^0$ mesons in intervals of $p_\mathrm{T}$ and $y^\ast$ for $p_\mathrm{T} < 10\,\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in backward rapidity regions.

Forward-backward production ratio $R_\mathrm{FB}$ for prompt $D^0$ mesons as a function of $p_\mathrm{T}$, integrated over $2.5 < |y^\ast| < 4.0$.