The $m_{jj}$ and $m_{J}$ projections for the number of observed events (black markers) compared with the backgrounds estimated in the fit to the data (filled histograms) in the CR. Pass and Fail categories are shown. The high level of agreement between the model and the data in the Fail region is due to the nature of the background estimate. The lower panels show the ``Pull'' defined as $(\text{observed events}{-}\text{expected events})/\sqrt{\smash[b]{\sigma_\text{obs}^{2} + \sigma_\text{exp}^{2}}}$, where $\sigma_\text{obs}$ and $\sigma_\text{exp}$ are the total uncertainties in the observation and the background estimation, respectively.

The $m_{jj}$ and $m_{J}$ projections for the number of observed events (black markers) compared with the backgrounds estimated in the fit to the data (filled histograms) in the MR. Pass and Fail categories are shown. The expected contribution from the signal benchmark with $M_{X} = 2200\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $M_{Y} = 250\,\mathrm{GeV}$ is overlaid in the MR Pass, assuming a production cross section of 5 fb. The high level of agreement between the model and the data in the Fail region is due to the nature of the background estimate.

The $m_{jj}$ and $m_{J}$ projections for the number of observed events (black markers) compared with the backgrounds estimated in the fit to the data (filled histograms) in the MR. Pass and Fail categories are shown. The expected contribution from the signal benchmark with $M_{X} = 2200\,\mathrm{GeV}$ and $M_{Y} = 250\,\mathrm{GeV}$ is overlaid in the MR Pass, assuming a production cross section of 5 fb. The high level of agreement between the model and the data in the Fail region is due to the nature of the background estimate.

The $m_{jj}$ and $m_{J}$ projections for the number of observed events (black markers) compared with the backgrounds estimated in the fit to the data (filled histograms) in the MR. Pass and Fail categories are shown.

The $m_{jj}$ and $m_{J}$ projections for the number of observed events (black markers) compared with the backgrounds estimated in the fit to the data (filled histograms) in the MR. Pass and Fail categories are shown.

The expected and observed 95% confidence level upper limits on the cross section $\sigma(\mathrm{pp} \to \mathrm{X} \to (\mathrm{H} \to b\bar{b})(\mathrm{Y} \to WW \to 4q))$ are shown for different values of $M_X$ and $M_Y$. The limits have been evaluated in discrete steps corresponding to the centers of the boxes. The numbers in the boxes are given in fb. In addition to the observed and median expected limits, the expected limits at $\pm1\sigma$ and $\pm2\sigma$ quantiles are also provided. These represent the regions containing 68% and 95%, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis.

The median expected (dashed line) and observed (solid line) 95% confidence level upper limits on the main and three alternative signal scenarios as a function of $M_{X}$. The inner (green) band and outer (yellow) band represent the regions containing 68% and 95%, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis.

The median expected (dashed line) and observed (solid line) 95% confidence level upper limits on the main and three alternative signal scenarios as a function of $M_{X}$. The inner (green) band and outer (yellow) band represent the regions containing 68% and 95%, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis.

The median expected (dashed line) and observed (solid line) 95% confidence level upper limits on the main and three alternative signal scenarios as a function of $M_{X}$. The inner (green) band and outer (yellow) band represent the regions containing 68% and 95%, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis.

The median expected (dashed line) and observed (solid line) 95% confidence level upper limits on the main and three alternative signal scenarios as a function of $M_{X}$. The inner (green) band and outer (yellow) band represent the regions containing 68% and 95%, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis.

Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma(\mathrm{pp}\rightarrow\mathrm{Z}^\prime+X)\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{Z}^\prime\rightarrow e\mu)$ as a function of the Z′ mass (110–500 GeV), at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV with 138 fb$^{-1}$.

Parametric models of the signal process for mX=1000GeV, mY=800GeV in their most sensitive SR. The histograms are normalized to unity. The acronym 'dof' stands for the numbers of degrees of freedom of the parametric model. The signal is modeled using a double-sided Crystal Ball (DCB) function defined as: DCB$(x)$ = \[ \begin{cases} N \cdot A_1 \cdot (B_1 - x_s)^{-m_1}, & x_s \leq -\beta_1 \\ N \cdot e^{-\frac{1}{2} x_s^2}, & -\beta_1 < x_s < \beta_2 \\ N \cdot A_2 \cdot (B_2 + x_s)^{-m_2}, & x_s \geq \beta_2 \end{cases} \] with \(x_s = \frac{x - \mu}{\sigma}\), and: \[ A_1 = \left( \frac{m_1}{\beta_1} \right)^{m_1} e^{-\frac{1}{2} \beta_1^2}, \quad B_1 = \frac{m_1}{\beta_1} - \beta_1 \] \[ A_2 = \left( \frac{m_2}{\beta_2} \right)^{m_2} e^{-\frac{1}{2} \beta_2^2}, \quad B_2 = \frac{m_2}{\beta_2} - \beta_2 \] The DCB parameters for this signal model are: \[ \begin{aligned} N &= 0.35127, & \mu &= 798.50175, & \sigma &= 7.32360 \\ \beta_1 &= 1.50996, & m_1 &= 5.30414, & \beta_2 &= 1.56253, & m_2 &= 18.3172 \end{aligned} \]

Background-only fit (red line) and signal+background fit (blue line) for the mass point hypothesis of mX=280GeV, mY=90GeV. The red line in the lower panel shows the background-only fit, which is by definition zero, and it is added as a visual aid. The most sensitive SR is shown. The choice of the background functional form is determined by the maximum likelihood fit. Category 0 is the most sensitive signal region. Drell-Yan background component is fitted as \[f_{\text{DY}}(m) = \frac{0.530965}{\sqrt{2\pi} \cdot 2.81859} \cdot \exp\left( -\frac{(m - 90.7199)^2}{2 \cdot 2.81859^2} \right)\] In the both the background-only fit and signal plus background fit, the non-resonant component of the pdf is choosing the following function. \[f(m) = \frac{1}{2.6086 \times 10^{-6}} \cdot m^{-3.82346}\] The fitted normalization factor for the function is: 23.5522 Signal fitted r value is 1.21391 in all the category simultaneous fit. The signal is fitted with a double-sided Crystal Ball (DCB) function defined as: DCB$(x)$ = \[ \begin{cases} N \cdot A_1 \cdot (B_1 - x_s)^{-m_1}, & x_s \leq -\beta_1 \\ N \cdot e^{-\frac{1}{2} x_s^2}, & -\beta_1 < x_s < \beta_2 \\ N \cdot A_2 \cdot (B_2 + x_s)^{-m_2}, & x_s \geq \beta_2 \end{cases} \] with \(x_s = \frac{x - \mu}{\sigma}\), and: \[ A_1 = \left( \frac{m_1}{\beta_1} \right)^{m_1} e^{-\frac{1}{2} \beta_1^2}, \quad B_1 = \frac{m_1}{\beta_1} - \beta_1 \] \[ A_2 = \left( \frac{m_2}{\beta_2} \right)^{m_2} e^{-\frac{1}{2} \beta_2^2}, \quad B_2 = \frac{m_2}{\beta_2} - \beta_2 \] The DCB parameters are: 2016: \[ \begin{aligned} N &= 0.6422, & \mu &= 89.9423, & \sigma &= 0.8881 \\ \beta_1 &= 1.3471, & m_1 &= 2.7908, & \beta_2 &= 1.4211, & m_2 &= 19.9999 \end{aligned} \] 2017: \[ \begin{aligned} N &= 0.8047, & \mu &= 89.9948, & \sigma &= 1.03024 \\ \beta_1 &= 1.6449, & m_1 &= 1.9425, & \beta_2 &= 1.7434, & m_2 &= 19.9982 \end{aligned} \] 2018: \[ \begin{aligned} N &= 1.1200, & \mu &= 90.0211, & \sigma &= 0.9284 \\ \beta_1 &= 1.1778, & m_1 &= 4.4273, & \beta_2 &= 1.5851, & m_2 &= 7.1198 \end{aligned} \] The plot is filled with a bin size of 5.84GeV.

Background-only fit (red line) and signal+background fit (blue line) for the mass point hypothesis of mX=280GeV, mY=90GeV. The red line in the lower panel shows the background-only fit, which is by definition zero, and it is added as a visual aid. The second most sensitive SR is shown. The choice of the background functional form is determined by the maximum likelihood fit. Category 1 is the second most sensitive signal region. Drell-Yan background component is fitted as \[f_{\text{DY}}(m) = \frac{0.532195}{\sqrt{2\pi} \cdot 3.10187} \cdot \exp\left( -\frac{(m - 89.7677)^2}{2 \cdot 3.10187^2} \right)\] In the both the background-only fit and signal plus background fit, the non-resonant component of the pdf is choosing the following function. \[f(m) = \frac{1}{14.0606} \cdot \exp\left(-\left(0.1 \cdot \frac{m}{100} + 1.73 \cdot \left(\frac{m}{100}\right)^2\right)\right)\] The fitted normalization factor for the function is: 21.6386 Signal fitted r value is 1.21391 in all the category simultaneous fit. The signal is fitted with a double-sided Crystal Ball (DCB) function defined as: DCB$(x)$ = \[ \begin{cases} N \cdot A_1 \cdot (B_1 - x_s)^{-m_1}, & x_s \leq -\beta_1 \\ N \cdot e^{-\frac{1}{2} x_s^2}, & -\beta_1 < x_s < \beta_2 \\ N \cdot A_2 \cdot (B_2 + x_s)^{-m_2}, & x_s \geq \beta_2 \end{cases} \] with \(x_s = \frac{x - \mu}{\sigma}\), and: \[ A_1 = \left( \frac{m_1}{\beta_1} \right)^{m_1} e^{-\frac{1}{2} \beta_1^2}, \quad B_1 = \frac{m_1}{\beta_1} - \beta_1 \] \[ A_2 = \left( \frac{m_2}{\beta_2} \right)^{m_2} e^{-\frac{1}{2} \beta_2^2}, \quad B_2 = \frac{m_2}{\beta_2} - \beta_2 \] The DCB parameters are: 2016: \[ \begin{aligned} N &= 0.3784, & \mu &= 89.8969, & \sigma &= 0.9189 \\ \beta_1 &= 1.1920, & m_1 &= 3.7178, & \beta_2 &= 1.3318, & m_2 &= 10.9787 \end{aligned} \] 2017: \[ \begin{aligned} N &= 0.4914, & \mu &= 89.8859, & \sigma &= 1.0728 \\ \beta_1 &= 1.3515, & m_1 &= 3.2846, & \beta_2 &= 1.4371, & m_2 &= 20.0000 \end{aligned} \] 2018: \[ \begin{aligned} N &= 0.6766, & \mu &= 89.9327, & \sigma &= 1.1213 \\ \beta_1 &= 1.9188, & m_1 &= 1.5353, & \beta_2 &= 1.9907, & m_2 &= 12.4664 \end{aligned} \] The plot is filled with a bin size of 5.84GeV.

Observed(expected) upper limits on the $\sigma\mathcal{B}$ for the X to $Y(\gamma\gamma)H(bb)$ signal with the different mass hypotheses are shown with solid(dashed) lines. The green and the yellow bands define the $\pm 68\%$ and $\pm 95\%$ uncertainty bands, respectively. For visualization purposes, the upper limit for mass points with different $m_X$ has been multiplied with a constant factor quoted on the right of each band. Mass points with $m_X$ ranging from 600 to 1000GeV are shown.

Observed(expected) upper limits on the $\sigma\mathcal{B}$ for the X 5p $Y(\gamma\gamma)H(bb)$ signal with the different mass hypotheses are shown with solid(dashed) lines. The green and the yellow bands define the $\pm 68\%$ and $\pm 95\%$ uncertainty bands, respectively. For visualization purposes, the upper limit for mass points with different $m_X$ has been multiplied with a constant factor quoted on the right of each band. Mass points with $m_X$ ranging from 240 to 550GeV are shown.

Observed(expected) upper limits on the $\sigma\mathcal{B}$ for the X to $Y(\gamma\gamma)H(bb)$ signal with the different $m_Y$ hypotheses are shown with solid(dashed) lines. The inner (green) band and the outer (yellow) band indicate the regions containing $68\%$ and $95\%$, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis. This plot shows the set of mass points with the lowest $m_X = 240GeV$

Observed(expected) upper limits on the $\sigma\mathcal{B}$ for the X to $Y(\gamma\gamma)H(bb)$ signal with the different $m_Y$ hypotheses are shown with solid(dashed) lines. The inner (green) band and the outer (yellow) band indicate the regions containing $68\%$ and $95\%$, respectively, of the distribution of limits expected under the background-only hypothesis. This plot shows the set of mass points with the highest $m_{X} = 1000GeV$

Predictions of a leading order (LO) QCD simulation, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$^{-1}$. The number of events are examined within bins of the four-jet mass and the ratio $\alpha$, which is the average dijet mass divided by the four-jet mass.

The 68% probability contour in the $m_{\mathrm{4j}}$ vs. $\overline{m}_{\mathrm{2j}}$ plane from a signal simulation of a diquark with a width of 1.5% and a mass of 8.4 TeV, decaying to a pair of vector-like quarks, each with a mass of 2.1 TeV.

The 68% probability contour in the $m_{\mathrm{4j}}$ vs. $\overline{m}_{\mathrm{2j}}$ plane from a signal simulation of a diquark with a width of 5% and a mass of 8.4 TeV, decaying to a pair of vector-like quarks, each with a mass of 2.1 TeV.

The 68% probability contour in the $m_{\mathrm{4j}}$ vs. $\overline{m}_{\mathrm{2j}}$ plane from a signal simulation of a diquark with a width of 10% and a mass of 8.4 TeV, decaying to a pair of vector-like quarks, each with a mass of 2.1 TeV.

The 68% probability contour in the $m_{\mathrm{4j}}$ vs. $\alpha$ plane from a signal simulation of a diquark with a width of 1.5% and a mass of 8.4 TeV, decaying to a pair of vector-like quarks, each with a mass of 2.1 TeV.

The 68% probability contour in the $m_{\mathrm{4j}}$ vs. $\alpha$ plane from a signal simulation of a diquark with a width of 5% and a mass of 8.4 TeV, decaying to a pair of vector-like quarks, each with a mass of 2.1 TeV.

The 68% probability contour in the $m_{\mathrm{4j}}$ vs. $\alpha$ plane from a signal simulation of a diquark with a width of 10% and a mass of 8.4 TeV, decaying to a pair of vector-like quarks, each with a mass of 2.1 TeV.

Signal differential distributions as a function of four-jet mass for $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}}$ = 0.25, diquark masses of 2, 5, 8.6 TeV and various widths, for all $\alpha$ bins inclusively. The integral of each distribution has been normalized to unity.

The product of acceptance, $A$, and efficiency, $\varepsilon$, of a resonant signal with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}}$ = 0.25 vs. the diquark mass for various diquark widths, and for all $\alpha$ bins inclusively. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of generated events passing the kinematic selection criteria, while the efficiency is the fraction of signal events satisfying $m_{\mathrm{4j}} > 1.6$ TeV. We also show the signal acceptance alone in the curves where $\varepsilon = 1$.

The four-jet mass distribution in data for 0.22 < $\alpha$ < 0.24, fitted with three background-only functions (Dijet-3p, PowExp-3p and ModDijet-3p), each with three free parameters. Examples of predicted diquark resonances with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}}$ = 0.25, $M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 8.6 TeV, and $\Gamma/M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 1.5%, 10% are also shown, with cross sections equal to the observed upper limits at 95% confidence level.

The four-jet mass distribution in data for 0.24 < $\alpha$ < 0.26, fitted with three background-only functions (Dijet-3p, PowExp-3p and ModDijet-3p), each with three free parameters. Examples of predicted diquark resonances with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}}$ = 0.25, $M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 8.6 TeV, and $\Gamma/M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 1.5%, 10% are also shown, with cross sections equal to the observed upper limits at 95% confidence level.

The four-jet mass distribution in data for 0.26 < $\alpha$ < 0.28, fitted with three background-only functions (Dijet-3p, PowExp-3p and ModDijet-3p), each with three free parameters. Examples of predicted diquark resonances with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}}$ = 0.25, $M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 8.6 TeV and $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}}$ = 0.29, $M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 3.6 TeV, each shown for widths of $\Gamma/M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 1.5% and 10% are also included, with cross sections equal to the observed upper limits at 95% confidence level.

The four-jet mass distribution in data for 0.28 < $\alpha$ < 0.30, fitted with three background-only functions (Dijet-3p, PowExp-3p and ModDijet-3p), each with three free parameters. Examples of predicted diquark resonances with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}}$ = 0.25, $M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 8.6 TeV and $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}}$ = 0.29, $M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 3.6 TeV, each shown for widths of $\Gamma/M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 1.5% and 10% are also included, with cross sections equal to the observed upper limits at 95% confidence level.

The four-jet mass distribution in data for 0.30 < $\alpha$ < 0.32, fitted with three background-only functions (Dijet-3p, PowExp-3p and ModDijet-3p), each with three free parameters. Examples of predicted diquark resonances with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}}$ = 0.25, $M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 8.6 TeV and $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}}$ = 0.29, $M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 3.6 TeV, each shown for widths of $\Gamma/M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 1.5% and 10% are also included, with cross sections equal to the observed upper limits at 95% confidence level.

The four-jet mass distribution in data for 0.32 < $\alpha$ < 0.34, fitted with three background-only functions (Dijet-3p, PowExp-3p and ModDijet-3p), each with three free parameters. Examples of predicted diquark resonances with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}}$ = 0.25, $M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 8.6 TeV, and $\Gamma/M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 1.5%, 10% are also shown, with cross sections equal to the observed upper limits at 95% confidence level.

The inclusive four-jet mass distribution in data for $\alpha$ > 0.10, fitted with three background-only functions (Dijet-5p, PowExp-5p and ModDijet-5p), each with five free parameters. Examples of predicted diquark resonances with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}}$ = 0.25, $M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 8.6 TeV and $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}}$ = 0.29, $M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 3.6 TeV, each shown for widths of $\Gamma/M_{\mathrm{S}}$ = 1.5% and 10% are also included, with cross sections equal to the observed upper limits at 95% confidence level.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.25$ and width of the initial resonance Y equal to 1.5%. The corresponding expected limits and their variations at the 1 and 2 standard deviation (s.d.) levels are also included. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate a mediator width equal to 1.5%.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.25$ and width of the initial resonance Y equal to 5%. The corresponding expected limits and their variations at the 1 and 2 standard deviation (s.d.) levels are also included. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate a mediator width equal to 5%.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.25$ and width of the initial resonance Y equal to 10%. The corresponding expected limits and their variations at the 1 and 2 standard deviation (s.d.) levels are also included. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate a mediator width equal to 10%.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.11$ and width of the initial resonance Y equal to 10%. The corresponding expected limits and their variations at the 1 and 2 standard deviation (s.d.) levels are also included. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate a mediator width equal to 10%.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.13$ and width of the initial resonance Y equal to 10%. The corresponding expected limits and their variations at the 1 and 2 standard deviation (s.d.) levels are also included. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate a mediator width equal to 10%.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.15$ and width of the initial resonance Y equal to 10%. The corresponding expected limits and their variations at the 1 and 2 standard deviation (s.d.) levels are also included. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate a mediator width equal to 10%.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.17$ and width of the initial resonance Y equal to 10%. The corresponding expected limits and their variations at the 1 and 2 standard deviation (s.d.) levels are also included. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate a mediator width equal to 10%.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.19$ and width of the initial resonance Y equal to 10%. The corresponding expected limits and their variations at the 1 and 2 standard deviation (s.d.) levels are also included. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate a mediator width equal to 10%.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.21$ and width of the initial resonance Y equal to 10%. The corresponding expected limits and their variations at the 1 and 2 standard deviation (s.d.) levels are also included. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate a mediator width equal to 10%.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.23$ and width of the initial resonance Y equal to 10%. The corresponding expected limits and their variations at the 1 and 2 standard deviation (s.d.) levels are also included. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate a mediator width equal to 10%.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.27$ and width of the initial resonance Y equal to 10%. The corresponding expected limits and their variations at the 1 and 2 standard deviation (s.d.) levels are also included. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate a mediator width equal to 10%.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.29$ and width of the initial resonance Y equal to 10%. The corresponding expected limits and their variations at the 1 and 2 standard deviation (s.d.) levels are also included. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate a mediator width equal to 10%.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.31$ and width of the initial resonance Y equal to 10%. The corresponding expected limits and their variations at the 1 and 2 standard deviation (s.d.) levels are also included. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate a mediator width equal to 10%.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.33$ and width of the initial resonance Y equal to 10%. The corresponding expected limits and their variations at the 1 and 2 standard deviation (s.d.) levels are also included. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate a mediator width equal to 10%.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.42$ and width of the initial resonance Y equal to 10%. The corresponding expected limits and their variations at the 1 and 2 standard deviation (s.d.) levels are also included. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate a mediator width equal to 10%.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.11$ and widths of the initial resonance Y equal to 1.5, 5, and 10%. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate the corresponding widths.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.13$ and widths of the initial resonance Y equal to 1.5, 5, and 10%. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate the corresponding widths.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.15$ and widths of the initial resonance Y equal to 1.5, 5, and 10%. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate the corresponding widths.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.17$ and widths of the initial resonance Y equal to 1.5, 5, and 10%. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate the corresponding widths.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.19$ and widths of the initial resonance Y equal to 1.5, 5, and 10%. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate the corresponding widths.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.21$ and widths of the initial resonance Y equal to 1.5, 5, and 10%. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate the corresponding widths.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.23$ and widths of the initial resonance Y equal to 1.5, 5, and 10%. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate the corresponding widths.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.27$ and widths of the initial resonance Y equal to 1.5, 5, and 10%. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate the corresponding widths.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.29$ and widths of the initial resonance Y equal to 1.5, 5, and 10%. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate the corresponding widths.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.31$ and widths of the initial resonance Y equal to 1.5, 5, and 10%. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate the corresponding widths.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.33$ and widths of the initial resonance Y equal to 1.5, 5, and 10%. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate the corresponding widths.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on the product of the cross section, branching fraction, and acceptance for resonant production of paired dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}} / M_{\mathrm{Y}} = 0.42$ and widths of the initial resonance Y equal to 1.5, 5, and 10%. Limits are compared to predictions for scalar $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $\mathrm{S}_{\mathrm{dd}}$ diquarks with couplings to pairs of up and down quarks, $y_{\mathrm{uu}}$ and $y_{\mathrm{dd}}$, and to pairs of vector-like quarks, $y_{\chi}$ and $y_{\omega}$, set appropriately in order to generate the corresponding widths.

Observed local $p$-value for a four-jet resonance, Y, decaying to a pair of dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}}/M_{\mathrm{Y}}$ = 0.25, and various widths of Y superimposed.

Observed local $p$-value for a four-jet resonance, Y, decaying to a pair of dijet resonances, X, with $\alpha_{\mathrm{true}} = M_{\mathrm{X}}/M_{\mathrm{Y}}$ = 0.29, and various widths of Y superimposed.

Measured fiducial cross section of the VBF production mode.