95% CL observed and expected upper limits on M_* for spin-independent (D5) WIMP models. The impact of the +-1sigma theoretical uncertainty on the observed limits and the expected +-1sigma range of limits in the absence of a signal are also given.

95% CL observed and expected upper limits on M_* for spin-dependent (D8) WIMP models. The impact of the +-1sigma theoretical uncertainty on the observed limits and the expected +-1sigma range of limits in the absence of a signal are also given.

95% CL observed and expected upper limits on M_* for spin-dependent (D9) WIMP models. The impact of the +-1sigma theoretical uncertainty on the observed limits and the expected +-1sigma range of limits in the absence of a signal are also given.

95% CL observed and expected limits on the nucleon-WIMP scattering cross-section for spin-independent (D1) WIMP models. The impact of the +-1sigma theoretical uncertainty on the observed limits and the expected +-1sigma range of limits in the absence of a signal are also given.

95% CL observed and expected limits on the nucleon-WIMP scattering cross-section for spin-independent (D5) WIMP models. The impact of the +-1sigma theoretical uncertainty on the observed limits and the expected +-1sigma range of limits in the absence of a signal are also given.

95% CL observed and expected limits on the nucleon-WIMP scattering cross-section for spin-dependent (D8) WIMP models. The impact of the +-1sigma theoretical uncertainty on the observed limits and the expected +-1sigma range of limits in the absence of a signal are also given.

95% CL observed and expected limits on the nucleon-WIMP scattering cross-section for spin-dependent (D9) WIMP models. The impact of the +-1sigma theoretical uncertainty on the observed limits and the expected +-1sigma range of limits in the absence of a signal are also given.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limit in the sbottom-neutralino mass plane.

Expected +1 sigma exclusion limit in the sbottom-neutralino mass plane.

Expected -1 sigma exclusion limit in the sbottom-neutralino mass plane.

Cross section x BR limit for the UED model.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the mass of Cambridge-Aachen jets with R=1.2.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the mass of Cambridge-Aachen jets with R=1.2 after splitting and filtering.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the mass of Cambridge-Aachen jets with R=1.2 after splitting and filtering.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the mass of Cambridge-Aachen jets with R=1.2 after splitting and filtering.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the mass of Cambridge-Aachen jets with R=1.2 after splitting and filtering.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the mass of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the mass of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the mass of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the mass of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the the splitting scale variable sqrt(d12) of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the the splitting scale variable sqrt(d12) of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the the splitting scale variable sqrt(d12) of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the the splitting scale variable sqrt(d12) of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the the splitting scale variable sqrt(d23) of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the the splitting scale variable sqrt(d23) of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the the splitting scale variable sqrt(d23) of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the the splitting scale variable sqrt(d23) of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the N-subjettiness ratio variable tau(12) of Cambridge-Aachen jets with R=1.2.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the N-subjettiness ratio variable tau(12) of Cambridge-Aachen jets with R=1.2.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the N-subjettiness ratio variable tau(12) of Cambridge-Aachen jets with R=1.2.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the N-subjettiness ratio variable tau(12) of Cambridge-Aachen jets with R=1.2.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the N-subjettiness ratio variable tau(32) of Cambridge-Aachen jets with R=1.2.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the N-subjettiness ratio variable tau(32) of Cambridge-Aachen jets with R=1.2.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the N-subjettiness ratio variable tau(32) of Cambridge-Aachen jets with R=1.2.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the N-subjettiness ratio variable tau(32) of Cambridge-Aachen jets with R=1.2.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the N-subjettiness ratio variable tau(21) of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the N-subjettiness ratio variable tau(21) of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the N-subjettiness ratio variable tau(21) of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the N-subjettiness ratio variable tau(21) of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the N-subjettiness ratio variable tau(32) of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the N-subjettiness ratio variable tau(32) of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the N-subjettiness ratio variable tau(32) of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

Normalised cross-section as a function of the N-subjettiness ratio variable tau(32) of anti-kT jets with R=1.0.

The observed 95% CL limits on the minimal GMSB model parameters Lambda and tan(beta) over the tan(beta) region 0.8 to 6.8.

The observed 95% CL limits on the minimal GMSB model parameters Lambda and tan(beta) over the tan(beta) region 6.8 to 12.8.

The observed 95% CL limits on the minimal GMSB model parameters Lambda and tan(beta) over the tan(beta) region 12.8 to 18.8.

The observed 95% CL limits on the minimal GMSB model parameters Lambda and tan(beta) over the tan(beta) region 18.8 to 24.8.

The observed 95% CL limits on the minimal GMSB model parameters Lambda and tan(beta) over the tan(beta) region 24.8 to 30.8.

The observed 95% CL limits on the minimal GMSB model parameters Lambda and tan(beta) over the tan(beta) region 30.8 to 36.8.

The observed 95% CL limits on the minimal GMSB model parameters Lambda and tan(beta) over the tan(beta) region 36.8 to 42.8.

The observed 95% CL limits on the minimal GMSB model parameters Lambda and tan(beta) over the tan(beta) region 42.8 to 48.8.

The observed 95% CL limits on the minimal GMSB model parameters Lambda and tan(beta) over the tan(beta) region 48.8 to 51.2.

The observed and expected 95% CL limits on the minimal GMSB model parameters Lambda and tan(beta).

The acceptance, efficiency and their product in the Lambda-Tan(Beta)-plane for M_mess=250 TeV, N_5=3 and C_grav=1.

The relative systematic uncertainty from the selection, theoretical and statistical uncertainities and their combined values.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the visible and production cross sections in the Lambda-Tan(Beta) plane for stau and slepton NLSP production in the minimal GMSB model.

Figure 2-a. Expected limit +1sigma.

Figure 2-a. Expected limit.

Figure 2-a. Expected limit -1sigma.

Figure 2-b. Observed limit +1sigma-th.

Figure 2-b. Observed limit.

Figure 2-b. Observed limit -1sigma-th.

Figure 2-b. Expected limit +1sigma.

Figure 2. Auxiliary material. Cross section for the Gbb and Gtt model.

Figure 3a. Auxiliary material. Theoretical uncertainty for the Gbb model.

Figure 3b. Auxiliary material. Theoretical uncertainty for the Gtt model.

Figure 4a. Auxiliary material. Number of MC events for the Gbb model.

Figure 4b. Auxiliary material. Number of MC events for the Gtt model.

Figure 5a. Auxiliary material. Acceptance for the Gbb model in the signal region SR4-L.

Figure 5b. Auxiliary material. Acceptance for the Gbb model in the signal region SR4-M.

Figure 5c. Auxiliary material. Acceptance for the Gbb model in the signal region SR4-T.

Figure 6a. Auxiliary material. Acceptance for the Gtt model in the signal region SR6-L.

Figure 6b. Auxiliary material. Acceptance for the Gtt model in the signal region SR6-T.

Figure 7a. Auxiliary material. Efficiency for the Gbb model in the signal region SR4-L.

Figure 7b. Auxiliary material. Efficiency for the Gbb model in the signal region SR4-M.

Figure 7c. Auxiliary material. Efficiency for the Gbb model in the signal region SR4-T.

Figure 8a. Auxiliary material. Efficiency for the Gtt model in the signal region SR6-L.

Figure 8b. Auxiliary material. Efficiency for the Gtt model in the signal region SR6-T.

Figure 9a. Auxiliary material. Experimental uncertainty for the Gbb model in the signal region SR4-L.

Figure 9b. Auxiliary material. Experimental uncertainty for the Gbb model in the signal region SR4-M.

Figure 9c. Auxiliary material. Experimental uncertainty for the Gbb model in the signal region SR4-T.

Figure 10a. Auxiliary material. Experimental uncertainty for the Gtt model in the signal region SR6-L.

Figure 10b. Auxiliary material. Experimental uncertainty for the Gtt model in the signal region SR6-T.

Figure 11a. Auxiliary material. Observed CLs for the Gbb model in the signal region SR4-L.

Figure 11b. Auxiliary material. Observed CLs for the Gbb model in the signal region SR4-M.

Figure 11c. Auxiliary material. Observed CLs for the Gbb model in the signal region SR4-T.

Figure 12a. Auxiliary material. Observed CLs for the Gtt model in the signal region SR6-L.

Figure 12b. Auxiliary material. Observed CLs for the Gtt model in the signal region SR6-T.

Figure 13a. Auxiliary material. Expected CLs for the Gbb model in the signal region SR4-L.

Figure 13b. Auxiliary material. Expected CLs for the Gbb model in the signal region SR4-M.

Figure 13c. Auxiliary material. Expected CLs for the Gbb model in the signal region SR4-T.

Figure 14a. Auxiliary material. Expected CLs for the Gtt model in the signal region SR6-L.

Figure 14b. Auxiliary material. Expected CLs for the Gtt model in the signal region SR6-T.

Figure 15a. Auxiliary material. Upper Limit for the Gbb model.

Figure 15b. Auxiliary material. Upper Limit for the Gtt model.

Figure 16a. Auxiliary material. Best Signal Region for the Gbb model.

Figure 16b. Auxiliary material. Best Signal Region for the Gtt model.

95% C.L. observed exclusion contour for all regions combined.

Best expected signal region for signal points.

95% CLs observed upper limit on model cross-section for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>150$ GeV.

95% C.L. expected exclusion contour for the $m_{CT}>150 $ GeV region.

95% C.L. observed exclusion contour for the $m_{CT}>150 $ GeV region.

95% CLs observed upper limit on model cross-section for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>200$ GeV.

95% C.L. expected exclusion contour for the $m_{CT}>200 $ GeV region.

95% C.L. observed exclusion contour for the $m_{CT}>200 $ GeV region.

95% CLs observed upper limit on model cross-section for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>250$ GeV.

95% C.L. expected exclusion contour for the $m_{CT}>250 $ GeV region.

95% C.L. observed exclusion contour for the $m_{CT}>250 $ GeV region.

95% CLs upper limit on model cross-section for signal points in C1.

95% CLs upper limit on model cross-section for signal points in C2.

Acceptance times Efficiency for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>150$ GeV.

Acceptance times Efficiency for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>200$ GeV.

Acceptance times Efficiency for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>250$ GeV.

Acceptance (flavour-blind) for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>150$ GeV.

Acceptance (flavour-blind) for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>200$ GeV.

Acceptance (flavour-blind) for signal points in the signal region with $m_{CT}>250$ GeV.

Signal cross-sections and uncertainties.

Measured jet multiplicity distribution in the $W\mu\nu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured dilepton invariant mass distribution in the $Z\mu\mu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. P P --> Z0 JET(S) X.

Measured $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in the $Z\mu\mu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. P P --> Z0 JET(S) X.

Measured leading jet $p_{T}$ distribution in the $Z\mu\mu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. P P --> Z0 JET(S) X.

Measured jet multiplicity distribution in the $Z\mu\mu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. P P --> Z0 JET(S) X.

Measured transverse mass distribution in the $We\nu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in the $We\nu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured leading jet $p_{T}$ distribution in the $We\nu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured jet multiplicity distribution in the $We\nu$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured dilepton invariant mass distribution in the $Zee$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in the $Zee$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured leading jet $p_{T}$ distribution in the $Zee$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured jet multiplicity distribution in the $Zee$+jets control region for the inclusive SR1 selection, compared to the background expectations. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the data. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows.

Measured distribution of the jet multiplicity for the SR1 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of $E_{T}^{miss}$ for the SR1 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of leading jet $p_{T}$ for the SR1 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the leading jet $p_{T}$ to $E_{T}^{miss}$ ratio for the SR1 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the jet multiplicity for SR7 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the jet multiplicity for SR7 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the leading jet $p_T$ for SR7 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the leading jet $p_T$ for SR9 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the leading jet $p_T$ to $E_{T}^{miss}$ ratio for SR7 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Measured distribution of the leading jet $p_T$ to $E_{T}^{miss}$ ratio for SR9 selection compared to the SM expectations. The $Z\nu\nu$+jets contribution is shown as constrained by the $W\mu\nu$+jets control sample. Where appropriate, the last bin of the distribution includes overflows. The distribution of different ADD, WIMP and GMSB scenarios are included.

Observed and expected 95$\%$ CL limit on the fundamental Planck scale in $4+n$ dimensions, $M_D$, as a function of the number of extra dimensions. In the figure the two results overlap. The shaded areas around the expected limit indicate the expected $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ ranges of limits in the absence of a signal. The 95$\%$ CL observed limits after the suppression of the events with $\hat{s} > M_D^2$ is applied (truncated) are also given.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the scalar operator D1. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the vector operator D5. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the axial vector operator D8. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the tensor operator D9. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the gluon operator D11. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the gluon operator C5. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Observed 95% CL limits on the suppression scale M* as a function of the mediator mass Mmed, assuming a Z'-like boson in a simplified model and a DM mass of 50 GeV and 400 GeV. The width of the mediator is varied between Mmed/3 and Mmed/8pi.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of couplings of the simplified model vertex in the plane of mediator and WIMP mass (Mmed versus m_chi).

Upper limits at 90% C.L. on the WIMP-nucleon scattering cross section as a function of m_chi for spin-independent interactions, for a coupling strength of unity or the maximum value that keeps the model within its perturbative regime. The truncation procedure is applied for both cases.

Upper limits at 90% C.L. on the WIMP-nucleon scattering cross section as a function of m_chi for spin-dependent interactions, for a coupling strength of unity or the maximum value that keeps the model within its perturbative regime. The truncation procedure is applied for both cases.

Upper limits at 90% C.L. on the WIMP-nucleon annihilation cross section as a function of m_chi, for a coupling strength of unity or the maximum value that keeps the model within its perturbative regime. The truncation procedure is applied for both cases.

95$\%$ CL lower limits on the gravitino mass $m_{\tilde{G}}$ as a function of the squark mass $m_{\tilde{q}}$ for degenerate squark/gluino masses.

95$\%$ CL lower limits on the gravitino mass $m_{\tilde{G}}$ as a function of the squark mass $m_{\tilde{q}}$ for non-degenerate squark/gluino masses: $ m_{\tilde{g}} = 1/2 \times m_{\tilde{q}}$.

95$\%$ CL lower limits on the gravitino mass $m_{\tilde{G}}$ as a function of the squark mass $m_{\tilde{q}}$ for non-degenerate squark/gluino masses: $ m_{\tilde{g}} = 1/4 \times m_{\tilde{q}}$.

95$\%$ CL lower limits on the gravitino mass $m_{\tilde{G}}$ as a function of the squark mass $m_{\tilde{q}}$ for non-degenerate squark/gluino masses: $ m_{\tilde{g}} = 2 \times m_{\tilde{q}}$.

95$\%$ CL lower limits on the gravitino mass $m_{\tilde{G}}$ as a function of the squark mass $m_{\tilde{q}}$ for non-degenerate squark/gluino masses: $ m_{\tilde{g}} = 4 \times m_{\tilde{q}}$.

Observed and expected 95$\%$ CL upper limit on $\sigma \times {\rm{BR}}(H \to {\rm{invisible}})$ as a function of the Higgs boson mass.

Limits at 95% C.L. on the EFT suppression scale M* as a function of the WIMP mass m_chi, for the scalar operator C1. Results where EFT truncation is applied are also shown for couplings of 1 and the perturbative limit.

Distribution of missing transverse momentum in the data and for the background in the PhJetCR. The total background expectation is normali zed to the post-fit result. The errors include both statistical and systematic uncertainties determined by a bin-by-bin fit.

Distribution of missing transverse momentum in the signal region for data and for the background predicted from the fit in the CRs. Overflows are included in the final bin. The errors include both statistical and systematic components. The expected yield of events from the simplified model with $m_\chi$ = 150 GeV and $m_{med}$ = 500 GeV is also shown.

Distribution of photon transverse momentum in the signal region for data and for the background predicted from the fit in the CRs. Overflows are included in the final bin. The errors include both statistical and systematic components. The expected yield of events from the simplified model with $m_\chi$ = 150 GeV and $m_{med}$ = 500 GeV is also shown.

The observed and 95% CL exclusion limit for a simplified model of dark matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_q$ = 0.25 and $g_\chi$ = 1 as a function of the dark matter mass $m_\chi$ and the axial-mediator mass $m_{med}$.

The observed 90% CL exclusion limit on the DM-proton scattering cross section in a simplifed model of dark matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_q$ = 0.25 and $g_\chi$ = 1 as a function of the dark matter mass $m_\chi$.

The observed 95% CL lower limits on $M_\ast$ for a dimension-7 operator EFT model with a contact interaction of type $\gamma\gamma\chi\chi$ as a function of dark matter mass $m_\chi$.

The observed 95% CL lower limits on the mass scale $M_D$ in the ADD models of large extra dimensions, for several values of the number of extra dimensions.