Observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(gg)g) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance. The acceptance $\mathcal{A}$ is defined as $\mathcal{A} = N$(events with $m_{X}^{GEN} > 85\% m_{X}^{input}$) / $N$(events generated in the full phase space defined by the CMS default generator settings). Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Mass exclusion ranges of the benchmark signal scenarios are depicted with hatched areas inside the black contours.

Observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(qq)q) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance. The acceptance $\mathcal{A}$ is defined as $\mathcal{A} = N$(events with $m_{X}^{GEN} > 85\% m_{X}^{input}$) / $N$(events generated in the full phase space defined by the CMS default generator settings). Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Mass exclusion ranges of the benchmark signal scenarios are depicted with hatched areas inside the black contours.

Efficiencies of the selection requirements on the benchmark signal processes: $Z_{R} \to ggg$ with nominal width ($\Gamma_{X}/m_{X}\sim 3\%$). A value of -1 means that the corresponding efficiency is not calculated for this year.

Efficiencies of the selection requirements on the benchmark signal processes: $Z_{R} \to ggg$ with narrow width ($\Gamma_{X}/m_{X}\sim 0.01\%$). A value of -1 means that the corresponding efficiency is not calculated for this year.

Efficiencies of the selection requirements on the benchmark signal processes: $G_{KK} \to {\varphi}(gg)g$, where $\varphi$ is the radion. A value of -1 means that the corresponding efficiency is not calculated for this year.

Efficiencies of the selection requirements on the benchmark signal processes: $q^{*} \to V(qq)q$, where $V$ is a beyond-the-SM vector boson. A value of -1 means that the corresponding efficiency is not calculated for this year.

Acceptance of the signal selection requirement $m_{X}^{\text{GEN}}/m_{X}^{\text{input}} > 85\%$ on the benchmark signal process $Z_{R} \to ggg$. The acceptance is defined as $\mathcal{A} = N$(events with $m_{X}^{\text{GEN}}/m_{X}^{\text{input}} > 85\%$)/$N$(events generated in the full phase space defined by the CMS default generator settings).

Acceptance of the signal selection requirement $m_{X}^{\text{GEN}}/m_{X}^{\text{input}} > 85\%$ on the benchmark signal process $G_{KK} \to {\varphi}(gg)g$.

Acceptance of the signal selection requirement $m_{X}^{\text{GEN}}/m_{X}^{\text{input}} > 85\%$ on the benchmark signal process $q^{*} \to V(qq)q$.

Observed local significance for a 3-body decay $ggg$ resonance, shown for resonances with nominal width (blue solid line) and narrow width (red dashed line).

Observed local significance for a cascade decay $ggg$ resonance.

Observed local significance for a cascade decay $qqq$ resonance.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(gg)g) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.2$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(gg)g) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.3$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(gg)g) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.4$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(gg)g) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.5$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(gg)g) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.6$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(gg)g) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.7$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(gg)g) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.8$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(qq)q) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.2$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(qq)q) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.3$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(qq)q) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.4$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(qq)q) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.5$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(qq)q) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.6$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(qq)q) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.7$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(qq)q) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.8$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal

Cut flow table of the selection requirments for the $Z_{R}$ model scenarios. Values shown are absolute efficiencies, e.g., values shown in the column of 'Efficiency ($\Delta_{R}^{max} < 3.0$)' represent the cumulative efficiencies achieved through all selection requirements applied up to and including the current selection criterion.

Cut flow table of the selection requirments for the $G_{KK}$ model scenarios. Values shown are absolute efficiencies, e.g., values shown in the column of 'Efficiency ($\Delta_{R}^{max} < 3.0$)' represent the cumulative efficiencies achieved through all selection requirements applied up to and including the current selection criterion.

Cut flow table of the selection requirments for the $q^{*}$ model scenarios. Values shown are absolute efficiencies, e.g., values shown in the column of 'Efficiency ($\Delta_{R}^{max} < 3.0$)' represent the cumulative efficiencies achieved through all selection requirements applied up to and including the current selection criterion.

Predicted production cross section of the benchmark signal process $pp \to Z_{R} \to ggg$.

Predicted production cross section of the benchmark signal process $pp \to G_{KK} \to \varphi(gg)g$.

Predicted production cross section of the benchmark signal process $pp \to q^{*} \to V(qq)q$.

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of $\kappa_{2V}$, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions.

Likelihood observed contours at 68% CL (solid line) and 95% CL (dashed line) in the $\kappa_{\lambda}$, $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter space, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions. The best-fit value, denoted by a cross in the plot, corresponds to the very first entry in the table.

Likelihood expected contours at 68% CL (teal shaded region) and 95% CL (yellow shaded region) in the $\kappa_{\lambda}$, $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter space, when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to their SM predictions.In the plot, the SM prediction is indicated by the star.

Likelihood observed contours at 68% CL (solid line) and 95% CL (dashed line) in the $c_{gghh}$ versus $c_{hhh}$ HEFT parameter space, with the remaining coefficient fixed to its SM value. The best-fit value, denoted by a cross in the plot, corresponds to the very first entry in the table.

Likelihood expected contours at 68% CL (teal shaded region) 95% CL (yellow shaded region) in the $c_{gghh}$ versus $c_{hhh}$ HEFT parameter space, with the remaining coefficient fixed to its SM value. In the plot, the SM prediction is indicated by the star.

Likelihood observed contours at 68% CL (solid line) and 95% CL (dashed line) in the $c_{tthh}$ versus $c_{hhh}$ HEFT parameter space, with the remaining coefficient fixed to its SM value. The best-fit value, denoted by a cross in the plot, corresponds to the very first entry in the table.

Likelihood exptected contours at 68% CL (teal shaded region) and 95% CL (yellow shaded region) in the $c_{tthh}$ versus $c_{hhh}$ HEFT parameter space, with the remaining coefficient fixed to its SM value. In the plot, the SM prediction is indicated by the star.

The observed (filled circles) and expected (hollow circles) 95% CL upper limits on the $HH$ ggF production cross-section in the Standard Model and for seven HEFT benchmark points. The teal and yellow colored bands indicate the $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ variations on the expected limit due to statistical and systematic uncertainties. The predicted cross-sections of each of the models under consideration are shown by the red crosses. The contribution from VBF production to the total $HH$ production cross-section is neglected.

Likelihood observed contours at 68% CL (solid line) and 95% CL (dashed line) in the $c_{{H}\boxed{}}$ versus $c_{H}$ SMEFT parameter space, with the remaining coefficient fixed to its SM value. The best-fit value, denoted by a cross in the plot, corresponds to the very first entry in the table.

Likelihood expected contours at 68% CL (teal shaded region) 95% CL (yellow shaded region) in the $c_{{H}\boxed{}}$ versus $c_{H}$ SMEFT parameter space, with the remaining coefficient fixed to its SM value. In the plot, the SM prediction is indicated by the star.

The acceptance times efficiency for the signal ggF $HH$ process as a function of the coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in each analysis category. The other coupling modifiers affecting ggF $HH$ production are fixed to their SM predictions. The bands indicate the simulation statistical uncertainty.

The acceptance times efficiency for the signal VBF $HH$ process as a function of the coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in each analysis category. When varying $\kappa_{\lambda}$, the other coupling modifiers affecting the VBF $HH$ production mode are set to their SM predictions. The bands indicate the simulation statistical uncertainty.

The acceptance times efficiency for the signal VBF $HH$ process as a function of the coupling modifier $\kappa_{2V}$ in each analysis category. When varying $\kappa_{2V}$, the other coupling modifiers affecting the VBF $HH$ production mode are set to their SM predictions. The bands indicate the simulation statistical uncertainty.

Expected yields of the signal $HH$ process as a function of the coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}$ after applying the analysis preselection and in each analysis category after the final selection. The $HH$ yield is obtained considering both the $ggF$ and $VBF$ contributions. The other coupling modifiers affecting $HH$ production are fixed to their SM predictions. The bands indicate the simulation statistical uncertainty.

The acceptance times efficiency for the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{hhh}$ HEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The acceptance times efficiency for the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ HEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The acceptance times efficiency for the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ HEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The acceptance times efficiency for the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{H}$ SMEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The acceptance times efficiency for the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{{H}\boxed{}}$ SMEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The yield of the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{hhh}$ HEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The yield of the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ HEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The yield of the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ HEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The yield of the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{H}$ SMEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

The yield of the signal ggF $HH$ process in each analysis category as a function of the $c_{{H}\boxed{}}$ SMEFT coefficients. The dashed lines denote values that are excluded at 95% CL. The bottom panels show the efficiency of the sum of all analysis categories.

Distributions of the diphoton invariant mass for events in data (black dots with error bars) compared to the sum of the expected signal and backgrounds (histograms) in the low mass 1 region.

Distributions of the diphoton invariant mass for events in data (black dots with error bars) compared to the sum of the expected signal and backgrounds (histograms) in the low mass 2 region.

Distributions of the diphoton invariant mass for events in data (black dots with error bars) compared to the sum of the expected signal and backgrounds (histograms) in the low mass 3 region.

Distributions of the diphoton invariant mass for events in data (black dots with error bars) compared to the sum of the expected signal and backgrounds (histograms) in the low mass 4 region.

Distributions of the diphoton invariant mass for events in data (black dots with error bars) compared to the sum of the expected signal and backgrounds (histograms) in the high mass 1 region.

Distributions of the diphoton invariant mass for events in data (black dots with error bars) compared to the sum of the expected signal and backgrounds (histograms) in the high mass 2 region.

Distributions of the diphoton invariant mass for events in data (black dots with error bars) compared to the sum of the expected signal and backgrounds (histograms) in the high mass 3 region.

Observed (solid line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{hhh}$ HEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{hhh}$ HEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value

Observed (solid line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ HEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ HEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value

Observed (solid line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ HEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ HEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value

Observed (solid line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{H}$ SMEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value.

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{H}$ SMEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value.

Observed (solid line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{{H}\boxed{}}$ SMEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value.

Expected (dashed line) value of $-2\ln\Lambda$ as a function of the $c_{{H}\boxed{}}$ SMEFT coefficients when all other coupling modifiers are fixed to the SM value.

Summary of the expected (blue) and observed (orange) one-dimensional constraints at 68% (solid error bars) and 95% (dashed error bars) CL on the coefficients of selected HEFT (top) and SMEFT (bottom) operators describing Higgs boson interactions affecting $HH$ production through gluon--gluon fusion. The results are obtained from one dimensional scans of the profile log-likelihood assuming that all other Wilson coefficients are fixed to their SM values. The contribution from VBF $HH$ production is neglected.

Likelihood profiles of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter.

Likelihood profiles of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter.

The 95% CL upper limits on the $HH$ cross-section for different values of $\kappa_\lambda$. The expected limits assume no $HH$ production. The red line shows the theory prediction for the combined ggF $HH$ and VBF $HH$ cross-section as a function of $\kappa_\lambda$ where all parameters and couplings are set to their SM values except $\kappa_\lambda$. The bands surrounding the red cross-section line indicate the theoretical uncertainty on the predicted cross-section. The $\kappa_\lambda$ values in the interval $[-6.7, 15.3]$ cannot be excluded by this analysis.

The 95% CL upper limits on the VBF $HH$ cross section for different values of $\kappa_{2V}$. The expected limits assume no VBF $HH$ production. SM ggF $HH$ production is considered as background. The red line shows the theory prediction for the VBF $HH$ cross-section as a function of $\kappa_{2V}$ where all parameters and couplings are set to their SM values except $\kappa_{2V}$. The uncertainty band is smaller than the width of the plotted line. The $\kappa_{2V}$ values in the interval $[-0.3, 2.4]$ cannot be excluded by this analysis.

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

CF vs qinv

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

Rinv vs mT

lambda vs mT

lambda vs mT

lambda vs mT

lambda vs mT

lambda vs mT

lambda vs mT

lambda vs mT

lambda vs mT

lambda vs mT

lambda vs mT

lambda vs mT

lambda vs mT

$R_\mathrm{T}$ distribution using events with trigger particles $5<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<40~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13~\mathrm{TeV}$

$p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the toward region for different $R_\mathrm{T}$ intervals using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

$p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the away region for different $R_\mathrm{T}$ intervals using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

$p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the transverse region for different $R_\mathrm{T}$ intervals using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

$p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the toward region for different $R_\mathrm{T}$ intervals using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for p-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

$p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the away region for different $R_\mathrm{T}$ intervals using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for p-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

$p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the transverse region for different $R_\mathrm{T}$ intervals using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for p-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

$p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the toward region for different $R_\mathrm{T}$ intervals using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

$p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the away region for different $R_\mathrm{T}$ intervals using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

$p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the transverse region for different $R_\mathrm{T}$ intervals using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

Average $p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the toward region using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

Average $p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the toward region using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for p-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

Average $p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the toward region using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

Average $p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the away region using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

Average $p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the away region using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for p-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

Average $p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the away region using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

Average $p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the transverse region using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

Average $p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the transverse region using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for p-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

Average $p_\mathrm{T}$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the transverse region using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

$p_\mathrm{T}$-integrated yield normalised to $<N_\mathrm{ch}^\mathrm{T}>$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the toward region using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

$p_\mathrm{T}$-integrated yield normalised to $<N_\mathrm{ch}^\mathrm{T}>$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the away region using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

$p_\mathrm{T}$-integrated yield normalised to $<N_\mathrm{ch}^\mathrm{T}>$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the toward region using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for p-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

$p_\mathrm{T}$-integrated yield normalised to $<N_\mathrm{ch}^\mathrm{T}>$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the away region using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for p-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

$p_\mathrm{T}$-integrated yield normalised to $<N_\mathrm{ch}^\mathrm{T}>$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the toward region using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

$p_\mathrm{T}$-integrated yield normalised to $<N_\mathrm{ch}^\mathrm{T}>$ as a function of $R_\mathrm{T}$ in the away region using events with trigger particles $8<p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}<15~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ in the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta|<0.8$ and with $p_\mathrm{T}>0.5~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ for Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}=5.02~\mathrm{TeV}$

The number of events in data and simulations after the fit to data in the Top$\gamma$ CR, SS$WW\gamma$ CR, and signal region.

The distributions of the invariant mass of the dilepton-photon system after the signal region selection before the fit to data.The shaded band represents the Monte Carlo statistical unc

Upper limits on the cross section and derived limits in terms of Yukawa coupling at 95% CL for Hγ production initiated by light quarks.

The distributions of the invariant mass of the transverse mass of the WW system after the signal region selection before the fit to data.The shaded band represents the Monte Carlo statistical unc

The distributions of the invariant mass of the dilepton-photon system after the signal region selection before the fit to data.The shaded band represents the Monte Carlo statistical unc

The unrolled two-dimensional mTWW-mll$\gamma$ distributions with category 0 jet after the fit to data. The data are compared to the sum of the signal and expected background. The black points with error bars represent the data and their statistical uncertainties, whereas the hatched bands represent the total uncertainties in the predictions.

The distributions of the invariant mass of the transverse mass of the WW system after the signal region selection before the fit to data.The shaded band represents the Monte Carlo statistical unc

The unrolled two-dimensional mTWW-mll$\gamma$ distributions with category 1more jets after the fit to data. The data are compared to the sum of the signal and expected background. The black points with error bars represent the data and their statistical uncertainties, whereas the hatched bands represent the total uncertainties in the predictions.

The unrolled two-dimensional mTWW-mll$\gamma$ distributions with category 0 jet after the fit to data. The data are compared to the sum of the signal and expected background. The black points with error bars represent the data and their statistical uncertainties, whereas the hatched bands represent the total uncertainties in the predictions.

The unrolled two-dimensional mTWW-mll$\gamma$ distributions with category 1more jets after the fit to data. The data are compared to the sum of the signal and expected background. The black points with error bars represent the data and their statistical uncertainties, whereas the hatched bands represent the total uncertainties in the predictions.

Covariance matrix of the two parameters $A$ and $m$ of the linear 2-to-5-jets-bin adjustment in the background Monte Carlo. Please see the text of the paper for an explanation of $A$ and $m$. Best fit values of $A$ and m are available as a separate table in this HEPData record.

Best fit values of the two parameters $A$ and $m$ of the linear 2-to-6-jets-bin adjustment in the background Monte Carlo. Please see the text of the paper for an explanation of $A$ and $m$. Uncertainties on $A$ and $m$ can be obtained from the covariance matrix of the fit, available as a separate table in this HEPData Record.

Covariance matrix of the two parameters $A$ and $m$ of the linear 2-to-6-jets-bin adjustment in the background Monte Carlo. Please see the text of the paper for an explanation of $A$ and $m$. Best fit values of $A$ and m are available as a separate table in this HEPData record.

This table contains the pre-fit background model (i.e. setting all nuisance parameters to 0), the post-fit background model (i.e. setting all nuisance parameters to their best fit values given the observed data), and the observed data in the 4 Jets bin. Uncertainties are provided, but per-bin uncertainties do not capture the correlations between bins with nuisance parameter variations. For a full analysis, the full covariance matrix between the search regions, also present in this HEPData record, should be used.

This table contains the pre-fit background model (i.e. setting all nuisance parameters to 0), the post-fit background model (i.e. setting all nuisance parameters to their best fit values given the observed data), and the observed data in the 5 Jets bin. Uncertainties are provided, but per-bin uncertainties do not capture the correlations between bins with nuisance parameter variations. For a full analysis, the full covariance matrix between the search regions, also present in this HEPData record, should be used.

This table contains the pre-fit background model (i.e. setting all nuisance parameters to 0), the post-fit background model (i.e. setting all nuisance parameters to their best fit values given the observed data), and the observed data in the $\geq 6$ Jets bin. Uncertainties are provided, but per-bin uncertainties do not capture the correlations between bins with nuisance parameter variations. For a full analysis, the full covariance matrix between the search regions, also present in this HEPData record, should be used.

Covariance matrix between search regions, estimated by toy MC runs, varying the nuisance parameters according to their covariance matrix before performing any fit. Note that the two columns ($S_T$ Bin (axis 1)) and ($N_{jets}$ Bin (axis 1)) together define the x-axis of the covariance, and the two columns ($S_T$ Bin (axis 2)) and ($N_{jets}$ Bin (axis 2)) together define the y-axis of the covariance.

Covariance matrix between search regions, estimated by toy MC runs, varying the nuisance parameters according to their covariance matrix in the background-only fit. Note that the two columns ($S_T$ Bin (axis 1)) and (NJets Bin (axis 1)) together define the x-axis of the covariance, and the two columns ($S_T$ Bin (axis 2)) and (NJets Bin (axis 2)) together define the y-axis of the covariance.

Scan through (gluino mass, neutralino mass) parameter-space. This table has the gluino and neutralino mass as the independent parameters, and the following as dependent parameters: 1. Expected upper limits (95% $CL_s$) on signal strength, with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainty terms from limited statistics. 2. Observed upper limits (95% $CL_s$) on signal strength, with a $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainty from the theoretical prediction of the gluino production cross section. 3. Observed upper limits (95% $CL_s$) on gluino production cross section.

Scan through (squark mass, neutralino mass) parameter-space. This table has the squark and neutralino mass as the independent parameters, and the following as dependent parameters: 1. Expected upper limits (95% $CL_s$) on signal strength, with $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ uncertainty terms from limited statistics. 2. Observed upper limits (95% $CL_s$) on signal strength, with a $\pm 1\sigma$ uncertainty from the theoretical prediction of the squark production cross section. 3. Observed upper limits (95% $CL_s$) on squark production cross section.

Summary of results for cross-section of non-prompt $\psi(2S)$ decaying to a muon pair for 13 TeV data in fb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for non-prompt fraction of $J/\psi$ decaying to a muon pair as a percentage for 13 TeV data. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for non-prompt fraction of $\psi(2S)$ decaying to a muon pair as a percentage for 13 TeV data. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for prompt $\psi(2S)$ over $J/\psi$ ratio as a percentage for 13 TeV data. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for non-prompt $\psi(2S)$ over $J/\psi$ ratio as a percentage for 13 TeV data. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Correction factors for an assumed angular dependence $\propto 1+\lambda_{\theta} \cos^2\theta $ in the helicity frame, for several values of the parameter $\lambda_{\theta}$. The correction factors were found to be the same (within 1% - 2%) for $J/\psi$ and $\psi(2S)$ mesons, for prompt and non-prompt production mechanisms, and for the three rapidity intervals considered in this paper.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{1})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{2})|$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{2})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})|$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $\Delta\mathrm{R}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $\mathrm{m}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $\Delta\mathrm{R}_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{avg}}$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{3})|$ in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{3})|$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3})$ in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{4})|$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{4})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $H^{\mathrm{b}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $H^{\mathrm{b}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\Delta\phi(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1},\mathrm{b}_{\mathrm{soft}})|$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\Delta\phi(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1},\mathrm{b}_{\mathrm{soft}})|$ in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})|$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{2})|$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{2})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})|$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $\Delta\mathrm{R}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $\mathrm{m}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $H^{\mathrm{j}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $H^{\mathrm{j}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $\mathrm{m}_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{max}}$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $H^{\mathrm{light}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $H^{\mathrm{light}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $N_{\mathrm{b}}$ in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{1})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{1})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{2})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{2})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $\Delta\mathrm{R}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $\mathrm{m}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $\Delta\mathrm{R}_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{avg}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{3})|$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{3})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3})$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{4})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{4})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $H^{\mathrm{b}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $H^{\mathrm{b}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\Delta\phi(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1},\mathrm{b}_{\mathrm{soft}})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\Delta\phi(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1},\mathrm{b}_{\mathrm{soft}})|$ observable in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{2})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{2})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $\Delta\mathrm{R}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $\mathrm{m}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ observable in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $H^{\mathrm{j}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $H^{\mathrm{j}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $\mathrm{m}_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{max}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $H^{\mathrm{light}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $H^{\mathrm{light}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $N_{\mathrm{b}}$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{1})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{1})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{2})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{2})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $\Delta\mathrm{R}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $\mathrm{m}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $\Delta\mathrm{R}_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{avg}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{3})|$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{3})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3})$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{4})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{4})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $H^{\mathrm{b}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $H^{\mathrm{b}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\Delta\phi(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1},\mathrm{b}_{\mathrm{soft}})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\Delta\phi(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1},\mathrm{b}_{\mathrm{soft}})|$ observable in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{2})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{2})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $\Delta\mathrm{R}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $\mathrm{m}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ observable in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $H^{\mathrm{j}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $H^{\mathrm{j}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $\mathrm{m}_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{max}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $H^{\mathrm{light}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $H^{\mathrm{light}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $N_{\mathrm{b}}$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Fiducial cross sections from the measurements of all observables, compared to predictions from different ttbb simulation approaches. For each of the normalized differential measurements the fiducial cross section in the respective phase space is also determined. In the paper only one representative observable is quoted for each fiducial phase space, while here the measured cross section with the uncertainties from the fit to the respective observable is summarized.