Normalisation factors for the major background processes and ttW ($\Delta \eta < 0$) from the fit using only statistical uncertainties (fixing Nuisance Parameters (NP) to their fitted values) to data in all analysis regions.

Normalisation factors for the major background processes and ttW ($\Delta \eta < 0$) from the fit using using both statistical and systematic uncertainties to data in all analysis regions.

Correlation matrix between the Normalisation Factors in the fit using only statistical uncertainties (fixing Nuisance Parameters (NP) to their fitted values) to data in all analysis regions.

The most relevant systematic uncertainties ranked by their impact on the leptonic charge asymmetry ($A_c^{\ell}$) parameter at reconstructed level. The impact of the uncertainties is shown before and after the combined profile-likelihood fit to data in the signal and control regions. Pulls introduced by the fitting procedure are also shown. The entries shown in bold are the uncertainties of the freely floating background normalisations. ME stands for "matrix element", PS for "parton shower" and JER for "jet energy resolution". The gamma-uncertainties refer to the MC statistical uncertainties in a specific region and bin.

The most relevant systematic uncertainties ranked by their impact on the ttW Normalisation Factor ($\Delta \eta < 0$) parameter at reconstructed level. The impact of the uncertainties is shown before and after the combined profile-likelihood fit to data in the signal and control regions. Pulls introduced by the fitting procedure are also shown. ME stands for "matrix element", PS for "parton shower" and JER for "jet energy resolution". The gamma-uncertainties refer to the MC statistical uncertainties in a specific region and bin.

The predicted and observed numbers of events in the control and signal regions. The predictions are shown before the fit to data. The indicated uncertainties consider statistical as well as all experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties. Background categories with event yields with a value of 1.0e-6 have a negligible contribution to the region and are manually set to that value.

The predicted and observed numbers of events in the control and signal regions. The predictions are shown after the fit to data. The indicated uncertainties consider statistical as well as all experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties. Background categories with event yields with a value of 1.0e-6 have a negligible contribution to the region and are manually set to that value.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The slope parameter r as a function of centrality for collision energy of 200 GeV.

The slope parameter r as a function of centrality for collision energy of 62.4 GeV.

The slope parameter r as a function of centrality for collision energy of 39 GeV.

The slope parameter r as a function of centrality for collision energy of 27 GeV.

The slope parameter r as a function of centrality for collision energy of 19.6 GeV.

The slope parameter r as a function of centrality for collision energy of 11.5 GeV.

The slope parameter r as a function of centrality for collision energy of 7.7 GeV.

$<M_{inv}>$ asymmetries, $\eta$ > 0, maximum opening angle 0.2.

$p_T$ asymmetries, $\eta$ < 0, maximum opening angle 0.3.

$<M_{inv}>$ asymmetries, $\eta$ < 0, maximum opening angle 0.3.

$p_T$ asymmetries, $\eta$ > 0,maximum opening angle 0.3.

$<M_{inv}>$ asymmetries, $\eta$ > 0, maximum opening angle 0.3.

$p_T$ asymmetries, $\eta$ < 0, maximum opening angle 0.4.

$<M_{inv}>$ asymmetries, $\eta$ < 0, maximum opening angle 0.4.

$p_T$ asymmetries, $\eta$ > 0, maximum opening angle 0.4.

$<M_{inv}>$ asymmetries, $\eta$ > 0, maximum opening angle 0.4.

$\eta$ asymmetries, maximum opening angle 0.2.

$\eta$ asymmetries, maximum opening angle 0.3.

$\eta$ asymmetries, maximum opening angle 0.4.

Inclusive jet $A_{LL}$ vs. parton jet $p_T$ for 0.5<|eta|<1.0.

The uncertainties on the parton jet pT values are strongly correlated across the bins. The point-to-point statistical and systematic uncertainties on the measured A_LL values given above are only weakly correlated among the bins. The correlation matrix for the quadrature sum of the point-to-point statistical and systematic uncertainties is given below. In that matrix, the order of the rows and columns matches the bin numbering above. In addition to the point-to-point statistical and systematic uncertainties, there are two systematic uncertainties that are common to all the measured A_LL values (and not included in the systematic uncertainty numbers quoted above): (a) +/-0.0005 vertical shift uncertainty from relative luminosity and (b) +/-6.5% vertical scale uncertainty from polarization.

$A_{LL}$ model predictions for |eta|<0.5.

$A_{LL}$ model predictions for 0.5<|eta|<1.0.

$E_T^e$ distribution of $W^{\pm}$ candidate events, background contributions, and sum of backgrounds and W -> ev MC signal. This plot is for Positron 0.5<|eta|<1.1.

Signed $P_T$-balance distribution for e+/e- candidates reconstructed in the EEMC.

Distribution of the product of the TPC reconstructed charge sign and $E_T/p_T$.

Distribution of the invariant mass of Z/$\gamma^*$ -> e+ e- candidate events, with MC for comparison.

Longitudinal single-spin asymmetry $A_L$ for W+ production as a function of lepton pseudorapidity.

Longitudinal single-spin asymmetry $A_L$ for W- production as a function of lepton pseudorapidity.

Longitudinal single-spin asymmetry $A_L$ for W+ production as a function of lepton pseudorapidity.

Longitudinal double-spin asymmetry $A_{LL}$ for W+ production as a function of lepton pseudorapidity.

Longitudinal double-spin asymmetry $A_{LL}$ for W- production as a function of lepton pseudorapidity.

Longitudinal double-spin asymmetry $A_{LL}$ for theory $W^{+/-}$ production as a function of lepton pseudorapidity.

The fitted exponential slope of the T distribution as a function of X(NAME=POMERON).

The fitted exponential slope of the T distribution as a function of X(NAME=POMERON).

The fitted exponential slope of the T distribution as a function of X(NAME=POMERON).

The fitted exponential slope of the T distribution as a function of X(NAME=POMERON).

The fitted exponential slope of the T distribution as a function of X(NAME=POMERON).

The fitted exponential slope of the T distribution as a function of X(NAME=POMERON).

The fitted exponential slope of the T distribution as a function of X(NAME=POMERON).

The differential cross section as a function of PHI, the angle between the positron scattering plane and the proton scattering plane for the LRG and the LPS data samples.

The azimuthal asymmetries ALT and ATT as a function of X(NAME=POMERON).

The azimuthal asymmetries ALT and ATT as a function of BETA.

The azimuthal asymmetries ALT and ATT as a function of ABS(T).

The azimuthal asymmetries ALT and ATT as a function of Q**2.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 2.5 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.09 to 0.19 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 3.9 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.09 to 0.19 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 7.1 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.09 to 0.19 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 14 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.09 to 0.19 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 40 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.09 to 0.19 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 2.5 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.19 to 0.55 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 3.9 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.19 to 0.55 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 7.1 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.19 to 0.55 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 14 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.19 to 0.55 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 40 GeV**2 and ABS(T) = 0.19 to 0.55 GeV**2 for M(X) values of 3, 7, 15 and 30 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 2.5 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 3.9 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 7.1 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 14 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LPS data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 40 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 2.5 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 3.5 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 4.5 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 5.5 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 6.5 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 8.5 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 12 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 16 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 22 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 30 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 40 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 50 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 65 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 85 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 110 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 140 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 185 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The reduced diffractive cross sections obtained from the LRG data as a function of X(NAME=POMERON) for Q**2 = 255 GeV**2 and M(X) values of 3, 6, 11, 19 and 32 GeV.

The cross section for tau+ tau- production corrected to the simple kinematic acceptance region defined by N = M(P=3_4)**2/S > 0.01. Statistical errors onlyare shown. Also given is the cross section value corrected for the beam energy spread to correspond to the physical cross section at the central value of SQRT(S).

The forward-backward charge asymmetry in E+ E- --> MU+ MU- production corrected to the simple kinematic acceptance region ABS(COS(THETA(P=5))) < 0.95 and THETA(C=ACOL) < 15 degrees, and the energy of each fermion required to be greaterthan 6 GeV. Statistical errors only are shown. Also given are the asymmetries a fter correction for the beam energy spread to correspond to the physical asymmetry at the central value of SQRT(S).

The forward-backward charge asymmetry in E+ E- --> TAU+ TAU- production corrected to the simple kinematic acceptance region ABS(COS(THETA(P=5))) < 0.90 andTHETA(C=ACOL) < 15 degrees, and the energy of each fermion required to be great er than 6 GeV. Statistical errors only are shown. Also given are the asymmetriesafter correction for the beam energy spread to correspond to the physical asymm etry at the central value of SQRT(S).

The forward-backward charge asymmetry in E+ E- --> E+ E- production corrected to the simple kinematic acceptance region ABS(COS(THETA(P=5))) < 0.70 and THETA(C=ACOL) < 10 degrees, and the energy of each fermion required to be greater than 6 GeV. Statistical errors only are shown. Also given are the asymmetries after correction for the beam energy spread to correspond to the physical asymmetryat the central value of SQRT(S).

The forward-backward asymmetry in muon- and tau-pair production in the two sprime/s regions.

The forward-backward asymmetry in electron-pair production for cos(theta_e) <0.7.

The angular distribution for hadron production. The errors include statistical and systematic effects combined.

The angular distribution for electron-pair production. The errors include statistical and systematic effects combined.

The angular distribution for muon- and tau-pair production. The errors include statistical and systematic effects combined.

Results of fits to the data for the Electromagnetic Coupling Constant.