$p_{\rm T}$-differential yields of $\Lambda$(1520) (sum of particle and anti-particle states) in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$ $\mathrm{=}$ 5.02 TeV in multiplicity interval 20--40\%. The uncertainty 'sys,$p_{\rm T}$-correlated' indicates the systematic uncertainty after removing the contributions of $p_{\rm T}$-uncorrelated uncertainty.

$p_{\rm T}$-differential yields of $\Lambda$(1520) (sum of particle and anti-particle states) in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$ $\mathrm{=}$ 5.02 TeV in multiplicity interval 40--60\%. The uncertainty 'sys,$p_{\rm T}$-correlated' indicates the systematic uncertainty after removing the contributions of $p_{\rm T}$-uncorrelated uncertainty.

$p_{\rm T}$-differential yields of $\Lambda$(1520) (sum of particle and anti-particle states) in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$ $\mathrm{=}$ 5.02 TeV in multiplicity interval 60--100\%. The uncertainty 'sys,$p_{\rm T}$-correlated' indicates the systematic uncertainty after removing the contributions of $p_{\rm T}$-uncorrelated uncertainty.

Ratio of $p_{\rm T}$-integrated yields of $\Lambda$(1520) (sum of particle and anti-particle states) to charged $\pi$ ($\pi^{+} + \pi^{-}$) at midrapidity as a function of $\langle {\rm d}N_{\rm ch}/{\rm d} \eta_{\rm lab} \rangle$ in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ $\mathrm{=}$ 7 TeV.

Ratio of $p_{\rm T}$-integrated yields of $\Lambda$(1520) (sum of particle and anti-particle states) to charged $\pi$ ($\pi^{+} + \pi^{-}$) as a function of $\langle {\rm d}N_{\rm ch}/{\rm d} \eta_{\rm lab} \rangle$ in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ $\mathrm{=}$ 5.02 TeV. The uncertainty 'sys,uncorrelated' indicates the multiplicity uncorrelated systematic uncertainty.

Ratio of $p_{\rm T}$-integrated yields of $\Lambda$(1520) (sum of particle and anti-particle states) to K$^{-}$ at midrapidity as a function of $\langle {\rm d}N_{\rm ch}/{\rm d} \eta_{\rm lab} \rangle$ in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ $\mathrm{=}$ 7 TeV.

Ratio of $p_{\rm T}$-integrated yields of $\Lambda$(1520) (sum of particle and anti-particle states) to K$^{-}$ as a function of $\langle {\rm d}N_{\rm ch}/{\rm d} \eta_{\rm lab} \rangle$ in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ $\mathrm{=}$ 5.02 TeV. The uncertainty 'sys,uncorrelated' indicates the multiplicity uncorrelated systematic uncertainty.

Ratio of $p_{\rm T}$-integrated yields of $\Lambda$(1520) (sum of particle and anti-particle states) to its ground state particle $\Lambda$ ($\Lambda + \bar{\Lambda}$) at midrapidity as a function of $\langle {\rm d}N_{\rm ch}/{\rm d} \eta_{\rm lab} \rangle$ in inelastic pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ $\mathrm{=}$ 7 TeV.

Ratio of $p_{\rm T}$-integrated yields of $\Lambda$(1520) (sum of particle and anti-particle states) to its ground state particle $\Lambda$ ($\Lambda + \bar{\Lambda}$) as a function of $\langle {\rm d}N_{\rm ch}/{\rm d} \eta_{\rm lab} \rangle$ in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ $\mathrm{=}$ 5.02 TeV. The uncertainty 'sys,uncorrelated' indicates the multiplicity uncorrelated systematic uncertainty.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total uncertainty on the measured values of $\sigma(tq)$, $\sigma(\bar{t}q)$, $R_t$, and $\sigma(tq+\bar{t}q)$. The evaluation of the systematic uncertainties has a statistical uncertainty of $0.3\,\%$. Uncertainties contributing less than $1.0\,\%$ are marked with "$<1$" in the paper. To provide numerical values for this table in HEPdata, these uncertainties are approximated with $\pm 0.5\,\%$. This approximation is applied to all measurements for the following uncertainties$:$ JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by-jets, JES pileup, $b$-JES, jet vertex fraction, mistag efficiency and $W+\;$jets shape variation. For the measurement of $\sigma(tq)$ the approximation is applied in addition to the following uncertainties$:$ JES flavor response, $c$-tagging efficiency, $t\bar{t}$ generator + parton shower and $t\bar{t}$ ISR/FSR. For the measurement of $\sigma(\bar{t}q)$ the approximation is applied in addition to these uncertainties$:$ JES flavor response, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, and $t\bar{t}$ ISR/FSR. For the measurement of $R_t$ the approximation is applied in addition to these uncertainties$:$ JES detector, $b$-tagging efficiency, $c$-tagging efficiency, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance and $tq$ scale variations. For the measurement of $\sigma(tq+\bar{t}q)$ the approximation is applied in addition to these uncertainties$:$ JES flavor response, $c$-tagging efficiency, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $t\bar{t}$ generator + parton shower and $t\bar{t}$ ISR/FSR.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross sections and normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross sections as functions of ABS(YRAP(T)).

The cross sections for top-quark and top-antiquark production in the t-channel, together with the cross-section ratio.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross sections and normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross sections as functions of ABS(YRAP(TBAR)).

Parametrization factors for the $m_{t}$ dependence [see Eq. (4) in the paper] of $\sigma(tq)$, $\sigma(\bar tq)$, and $\sigma(t q+\bar t q)$.

The cross sections for top-quark and top-antiquark production in the t-channel, together with the cross-section ratio.

The value of $|V_{tb}|^{2}$ is extracted by dividing the measured value of $\sigma(t q+\bar t q)$ by the prediction of the approximate NNLO calculation. The experimental and theoretical uncertainties are added in quadrature.

Event yields for the 2-jet-$\ell^{+}$ and 2-jet-$\ell^{-}$ HPR channels. The expectation for the signal and background yields correspond to the result of the binned maximum-likelihood fit described in Sec. $\mathrm{VI~D}$ in the paper. The uncertainty of the expectations is the normalization uncertainty of each process after the fit, as described in Sec. $\mathrm{VII~F}$ in the paper.

Migration matrix relating the parton level $p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)$ shown on the $y$ axis and the reconstruction level $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell \nu b)$ shown on the $x$ axis for the top-quark $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution.

Migration matrix relating the parton level $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)$ shown on the $y$ axis and the reconstruction level $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\ell \nu b)$ shown on the $x$ axis for the top-antiquark $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ distribution.

Migration matrix relating the parton level $|y(t)|$ shown on the $y$ axis and the reconstruction level $|y(\ell \nu b)|$ shown on the $x$ axis for the top-quark $|y|$ distribution.

Migration matrix relating the parton level $|y(\bar t)|$ shown on the $y$ axis and the reconstruction level $|y(\ell \nu b)|$ shown on the $x$ axis for the top-antiquark $|y|$ distribution.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $|y(t)|$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $|y(\bar t)|$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $|y(t)|$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Normalized differential t-channel top-quark production cross section as a function of $|y(\bar t)|$ with the uncertainties for each bin given in percent.

Comparison between the measured differential cross sections and the predictions from the NLO calculation using the MSTW2008 PDF set. For each variable and prediction a $\chi^{2}$ value is calculated with HERAfitter using the covariance matrix of each measured spectrum. The theory uncertainties of the predictions are treated as uncorrelated. The number of degrees of freedom (NDF) is equal to the number of bins in the measured spectrum.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, $W+$ jets shape variation, and $t \bar{t}$ generator. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, $b-$JES, jet-vertex fraction, mistag efficiency, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, $W+$ jets shape variation, and $t \bar{t}$ generator. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}|y(t)|}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, $W+$ jets shape variation, $t \bar{t}$ generator, $t \bar{t}$ ISR/FSR, and unfolding. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}|y(\bar t)|}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, $b-$JES, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, mistag efficiency, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, $W+$ jets shape variation, $t \bar{t}$ generator, $t \bar{t}$ ISR/FSR, and unfolding. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{1}{\sigma}\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. The JES $\eta$ intercalibration uncertainty has a sign switch from the first to the second bin. For the $tq$ generator $+$ parton shower uncertainty a sign switch is denoted with $\mp$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, $b-$JES, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $c-$tagging efficiency, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, lepton uncertainties, $W+$ jets shape variation, and $t \bar{t}$ generator. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{1}{\sigma}\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. Sign switches within one uncertainty are denoted with $\mp$ and $\pm$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, $b-$JES, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, mistag efficiency, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, lepton uncertainties, $W+$ jets shape variation, and $t \bar{t}$ generator. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{1}{\sigma}\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}|y(t)|}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. Sign switches within one uncertainty are denoted with $\mp$ and $\pm$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content$:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, b-JES, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $b-$tagging efficiency, $c-$tagging efficiency, mistag efficiency, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, lepton uncertainties, $W+$jets shape variation, $t \bar{t}$ generator, $t \bar{t}$ISR/FSR, and unfolding. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Detailed list of the contribution of each source of uncertainty to the total relative uncertainty on the measured $\dfrac{1}{\sigma}\dfrac{\mathrm{d}\sigma}{\mathrm{d}|y(\bar t)|}$ distribution given in percent for each bin. The list includes only those uncertainties that contribute with more than $1\%$. Sign switches within one uncertainty are denoted with $\mp$ and $\pm$. The following uncertainties contribute to the total uncertainty with less than $1\%$ to each bin content $:$ JES detector, JES statistical, JES physics modeling, JES mixed detector and modeling, JES close-by jets, JES pileup, JES flavor composition, JES flavor response, b-JES, jet energy resolution, jet-vertex fraction, $b/\bar{b}$ acceptance, $b-$tagging efficiency, $c-$ tagging efficiency, mistag efficiency, $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$ modeling, lepton uncertainties, $W+$ jets shape variation, $t \bar{t}$ generator, $t \bar{t}$ ISR/FSR, and unfolding. In cases when the uncertainty is report to be "$<1\%$" in the table of the paper the uncertainty is approximated by a value of $0.5\%$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the differential cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the differential cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the differential cross section as a function of $|y(t)|$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the differential cross section as a function of $|y(\bar t)|$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the normalized differential cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(t)$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the normalized differential cross section as a function of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\bar t)$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the normalized differential cross section as a function of $|y(t)|$.

Statistical correlation matrices for the normalized differential cross section as a function of $|y(\bar t)|$.

Fiducial $W+b$-jets cross-section correlations of statistical errors in the 1-jet region in bins of $p_T^{b-jet}$.

Fiducial $W+b$-jets cross-section correlations of systematic errors in the 1-jet region in bins of $p_T^{b-jet}$.

Fiducial $W+b$-jets cross-section correlations of statistical errors in the 1-jet region in bins of $p_T^{b-jet}$ without single-top subtraction.

Fiducial $W+b$-jets cross-section correlations of systematic errors in the 1-jet region in bins of $p_T^{b-jet}$ without single-top subtraction.

Measured fiducial $W+b$-jets cross-section in the 2-jet region with statistical and systematic uncertainties in bins of $p_T^{b-jet}$. Also shown are the cross sections obtained without single-top subtraction. UPDATE (04 MAY 2019): units corrected from nb/GeV to fb/GeV.

Fiducial $W+b$-jets cross-section correlations of statistical errors in the 2-jet region in bins of $p_T^{b-jet}$.

Fiducial $W+b$-jets cross-section correlations of systematic errors in the 2-jet region in bins of $p_T^{b-jet}$.

Fiducial $W+b$-jets cross-section correlations of statistical errors in the 2-jet region in bins of $p_T^{b-jet}$ without single-top subtraction.

Fiducial $W+b$-jets cross-section correlations of systematic errors in the 2-jet region in bins of $p_T^{b-jet}$ without single-top subtraction.

Multiplicative correction factors for non-perturbative effects and additive corrections for double-parton interactions, derived from the ALPGEN simulation, applied to the MCFM and POWHEG predictions for the comparisons with unfolded results. The non-perturbative uncertainties include the hadronization and underlying event modelling, while the DPI uncertainties are based on the ATLAS measurement of $\sigma_{\rm eff}$.

Multiplicative correction factors for non-perturbative effects and additive corrections for double-parton interactions, derived from the ALPGEN simulation, applied to the MCFM and POWHEG predictions for the comparisons with unfolded results. The non-perturbative uncertainties include the hadronization and underlying event modelling, while the DPI uncertainties are based on the ATLAS measurement of $\sigma_{\rm eff}$.

Theoretical NLO predictions for the $W+b$-jet fiducial cross-section for one lepton flavour calculated with the MCFM program, corrected for non-perturbative effects and DPI contributions.

Differential cross section as function of the jet multiplicity.

Differential cross section as function of the pT of the pT-leading jet. The jet must have pT>30 GeV and must be separated from the charged leptons from the W and Z decays by DeltaR(jet,lepton) > 0.5.

Differential cross section for prompt D+ production.

Differential cross section for prompt D*+ production.

Differential cross section for prompt D*+ production.

Integrated cross sections for prompt charm particle production extraplated to PT=0. The second (sys) error is the uncertainty in the branching ratio The third (sys) error is the uncertainty in the extrapolation procedure.

Integrated cross sections for prompt charm particle production extraplated to PT=0. The second (sys) error is the uncertainty in the branching ratio The third (sys) error is the uncertainty in the extrapolation procedure.

Ratios of integrated fiducial CC and NC cross sections obtained from the combination of electron and muon channels with statistical (stat) and systematic (syst) uncertainties. The common fiducial regions are defined in Section 2.3.

Total cross sections times leptonic branching ratios obtained from the combination of electron and muon channels with statistical and systematic uncertainties, for $W^+$, $W^-$, their sum and the $Z/\gamma^*$ process measured at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV. The $Z/\gamma^*$ cross section is defined for the dilepton mass window $m_{\ell\ell} = 66 - 116$ GeV. The uncertainties denote the statistical (stat), the experimental systematic (syst), the luminosity (lumi), and acceptance extrapolation (acc) contributions.

Ratios of total CC and NC cross sections obtained from the combination of electron and muon channels with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The $Z/\gamma^*$ cross section is defined for the dilepton mass window $m_{\ell\ell} = 66 - 116$ GeV. The uncertainties denote the statistical (stat), the experimental systematic (syst), and acceptance extrapolation (acc) contributions.

The correlation coefficients of the $W^+$, $W^-$ and $Z$ fiducial cross-section measurements.

Measurement of the electron-to-muon cross-section ratios for the $W$ and $Z$ production, $R_W$ and $R_Z$. The uncertainties denote the statistical (stat) and the experimental systematic (syst) contributions.

Differential cross section for the $W^+ \to \ell^+\nu$ processes combined from $\ell = e, \mu$ decays extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the $W^- \to \ell^-\bar{\nu}$ processes combined from $\ell = e, \mu$ decays extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $46 < m_{\ell\ell} < 66$ GeV combined from $\ell = e, \mu$ decays extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV combined from $\ell = e, \mu$ decays extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV combined from $\ell = e, \mu$ decays extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the forward $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV combined from $\ell = e, \mu$ decays extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the forward $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV combined from $\ell = e, \mu$ decays extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the $W^- \to e^-\bar{\nu}$ process extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the $W^+ \to e^+\nu$ process extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to ee$ process in the invariant mass region $46 < m_{\ell\ell} < 66$ GeV extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to ee$ process in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the forward $Z/\gamma^* \to ee$ process in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to ee$ process in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the forward $Z/\gamma^* \to ee$ process in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the $W^- \to \mu^-\bar{\nu}$ process extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the $W^+ \to \mu^+\nu$ process extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \mu\mu$ process in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \mu\mu$ process in the invariant mass region $46 < m_{\ell\ell} < 66$ GeV extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Differential cross section for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \mu\mu$ process in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV extrapolated to the common fiducial region. The statistical, uncorrelated systematic, correlated systematic and luminosity uncertainties are given in percent.

Values of $E(W[Z])$ and $A(W[Z])$ correction factors for integrated $W\to\ell\nu$ and $Z\to\ell\ell$ measurements together with the total estimated uncertainties in percent. The separate electron and muon measurements are divided by the $E(W[Z])$ factors, as defined in Eq.(8), to correct them to the corresponding common fiducial region. The $A(W[Z])$ factors, defined in Eq. (9), are used to extract a total cross section. Finally, the ratios of $A(W[Z])$ correction factors are given for four combinations of $W^+$, $W^-$ and $Z$ treating all components of the $A(W[Z])$ uncertainties as correlated between processes, which is relevant for the acceptance uncertainties on the total cross-section ratios.

Values of $E(W)$ correction factors for the differential $W\to\ell\nu$ measurements together with the total estimated uncertainties in percent. The separate electron and muon measurements are divided by the $E(W)$ factors, as defined in Eq.(8), to correct them to the corresponding common fiducial region. This only affects the bin of highest $\eta_\ell$, all other $E(W)$ factors are exactly 1 without uncertainties.

Values of $E(Z)$ correction factors for the differential $Z/\gamma^*\to e^+e^-$ measurements together with the total estimated uncertainties in percent. The separate electron and muon measurements are divided by the $E(Z)$ factors, as defined in Eq.(8), to correct them to the corresponding common fiducial region.

Values of $E(Z)$ correction factors for the differential $Z/\gamma^*\to \mu^+\mu^-$ measurements together with the total estimated uncertainties in percent. The separate electron and muon measurements are divided by the $E(Z)$ factors, as defined in Eq.(8), to correct them to the corresponding common fiducial region.

Values of $E(Z)$ correction factors for the differential forward $Z/\gamma^*\to e^+e^-$ measurements together with the total estimated uncertainties in percent. The separate electron and muon measurements are divided by the $E(Z)$ factors, as defined in Eq.(8), to correct them to the corresponding common fiducial region.

Correlation coefficients between integrated cross sections extrapolated to the total phase space, $\sigma^\mathrm{tot}_{W \to \ell\nu}$ and $\sigma^\mathrm{tot}_{Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell}$ for four combinations of $W^+, W^-, W^{\pm}$ and $Z$. Values are given including and excluding the luminosity uncertainties.

Correlation coefficients between integrated fiducial cross sections in electron and muon channels for $W^{\pm}$ and $Z$. Values are given including and excluding the luminosity uncertainties.

The differential W charge asymmetry $A_{\ell}$ as defined in Eq. (19) from the combined electron and muon channel measurements. All uncertainties are quoted in % with respect to the $A_{\ell}$ values. The statistical (stat), uncorrelated (uncor) and correlated (cor) systematic uncertainties are reported.

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the integrated common fiducial cross sections using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups.

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the differential common fiducial cross sections for the $W^+ \to \ell^+\nu$ process using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups.

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the differential common fiducial cross sections for the $W^- \to \ell^-\bar{\nu}$ process$ using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups.

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the differential common fiducial W charge asymmetry $A_{\ell}$ using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups.

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the differential common fiducial cross sections for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $46 < m_{\ell\ell} < 66$ GeV using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups. The term 'EW' quantifies the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised ($\pm$). All predictions are corrected for leading two-loop EW contributions.

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the differential common fiducial cross sections for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups. The term 'EW' quantifies the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised ($\pm$).

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the differential common fiducial cross sections for the central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups. The term 'EW' quantifies the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised ($\pm$).

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the differential common fiducial cross sections for the forward $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups. The term 'EW' quantifies the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised ($\pm$).

Combined NNLO QCD and NLO EW predictions as defined in Eq. (15), c.f. Section 6.1.2 and Ref. [110] Chapter III.2.3, for the differential common fiducial cross sections for the forward $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ processes in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV using Table 15 input parameters and various NNLO PDFs. The given uncertainties correspond to the statistical accuracy from the numerical DYNNLO 1.5 integration (stat) and the PDF uncertainties, where the latter are evaluated following the different prescriptions of the PDF groups. The term 'EW' quantifies the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised ($\pm$).

Nominal NNLO QCD + NLO EW $K_f$-factors as defined in Eq. (20) for the differential $W^+ \to \ell^+\nu$ process. The $K_f$-factor is calculated as ratio of the best NNLO QCD + NLO EW prediction to the NLO QCD calculation using the MCFM/APPLGRID calculation, both using the ATLAS-epWZ12 NNLO PDF set, c.f. Section 7.1. In addition to the nominal $K_f$-factor, a full set of alternative $K$-factors is presented reflecting the following systematic variations, c.f. Tables 19 and 21. The factor $K_{FEWZ}$ uses FEWZ 3.1.b2 for the NNLO QCD prediction, combined with NLO EW. The factors $K_\mu$ reflect the variation of the renormalisation and factorisations scales ($\mu_R, \mu_F$ up/down) by factors of 2 and 0.5, respectively. The statistical uncertainty on each $K_f$-factor (stat) is obtained from the NNLO QCD calculation, while the numerical uncertainties from all other contributions are negligible.

Nominal NNLO QCD + NLO EW $K_f$-factors as defined in Eq. (20) for the differential $W^- \to \ell^-\bar{\nu}$ process. The $K_f$-factor is calculated as ratio of the best NNLO QCD + NLO EW prediction to the NLO QCD calculation using the MCFM/APPLGRID calculation, both using the ATLAS-epWZ12 NNLO PDF set, c.f. Section 7.1. In addition to the nominal $K_f$-factor, a full set of alternative $K$-factors is presented reflecting the following systematic variations, c.f. Tables 19 and 21. The factor $K_{FEWZ}$ uses FEWZ 3.1.b2 for the NNLO QCD prediction, combined with NLO EW. The factors $K_\mu$ reflect the variation of the renormalisation and factorisations scales ($\mu_R, \mu_F$ up/down) by factors of 2 and 0.5, respectively. The statistical uncertainty on each $K_f$-factor (stat) is obtained from the NNLO QCD calculation, while the numerical uncertainties from all other contributions are negligible.

Nominal NNLO QCD + NLO EW $K_f$-factors as defined in Eq. (20) for the differential central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ process in the invariant mass region $46 < m_{\ell\ell} < 66$ GeV. The $K_f$-factor is calculated as ratio of the best NNLO QCD + NLO EW prediction to the NLO QCD calculation using the MCFM/APPLGRID calculation, both using the ATLAS-epWZ12 NNLO PDF set, c.f. Section 7.1. In addition to the nominal $K_f$-factor, a full set of alternative $K$-factors is presented reflecting the following systematic variations, c.f. Tables 19 and 21. The factor $K_{FEWZ}$ uses the FEWZ 3.1.b2 NNLO QCD prediction, combined with NLO EW. The factors $K_\mu$ reflect the variation of the renormalisation and factorisations scales ($\mu_R, \mu_F$ up/down) by factors 2 and 0.5, respectively. The factors $K_{EW}$ quantify the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised (EW up/down). The statistical uncertainty on each $K_f$-factor (stat) is obtained from the NNLO QCD calculation, while the numerical uncertainties from all other contributions is negligible.

Nominal NNLO QCD + NLO EW $K_f$-factors as defined in Eq. (20) for the differential central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ process in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV. The $K_f$-factor is calculated as ratio of the best NNLO QCD + NLO EW prediction to the NLO QCD calculation using the MCFM/APPLGRID calculation, both using the ATLAS-epWZ12 NNLO PDF set, c.f. Section 7.1. In addition to the nominal $K_f$-factor, a full set of alternative $K$-factors is presented reflecting the following systematic variations, c.f. Tables 19 and 21. The factor $K_{FEWZ}$ uses the FEWZ 3.1.b2 NNLO QCD prediction, combined with NLO EW. The factors $K_\mu$ reflect the variation of the renormalisation and factorisations scales ($\mu_R, \mu_F$ up/down) by factors 2 and 0.5, respectively. The factors $K_{EW}$ quantify the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised (EW up/down). The statistical uncertainty on each $K_f$-factor (stat) is obtained from the NNLO QCD calculation, while the numerical uncertainties from all other contributions is negligible.

Nominal NNLO QCD + NLO EW $K_f$-factors as defined in Eq. (20) for the differential central $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ process in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV. The $K_f$-factor is calculated as ratio of the best NNLO QCD + NLO EW prediction to the NLO QCD calculation using the MCFM/APPLGRID calculation, both using the ATLAS-epWZ12 NNLO PDF set, c.f. Section 7.1. In addition to the nominal $K_f$-factor, a full set of alternative $K$-factors is presented reflecting the following systematic variations, c.f. Tables 19 and 21. The factor $K_{FEWZ}$ uses the FEWZ 3.1.b2 NNLO QCD prediction, combined with NLO EW. The factors $K_\mu$ reflect the variation of the renormalisation and factorisations scales ($\mu_R, \mu_F$ up/down) by factors 2 and 0.5, respectively. The factors $K_{EW}$ quantify the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised (EW up/down). The statistical uncertainty on each $K_f$-factor (stat) is obtained from the NNLO QCD calculation, while the numerical uncertainties from all other contributions is negligible.

Nominal NNLO QCD + NLO EW $K_f$-factors as defined in Eq. (20) for the differential forward $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ process in the invariant mass region $66 < m_{\ell\ell} < 116$ GeV. The $K_f$-factor is calculated as ratio of the best NNLO QCD + NLO EW prediction to the NLO QCD calculation using the MCFM/APPLGRID calculation, both using the ATLAS-epWZ12 NNLO PDF set, c.f. Section 7.1. In addition to the nominal $K_f$-factor, a full set of alternative $K$-factors is presented reflecting the following systematic variations, c.f. Tables 19 and 21. The factor $K_{FEWZ}$ uses the FEWZ 3.1.b2 NNLO QCD prediction, combined with NLO EW. The factors $K_\mu$ reflect the variation of the renormalisation and factorisations scales ($\mu_R, \mu_F$ up/down) by factors 2 and 0.5, respectively. The factors $K_{EW}$ quantify the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised (EW up/down). The statistical uncertainty on each $K_f$-factor (stat) is obtained from the NNLO QCD calculation, while the numerical uncertainties from all other contributions is negligible.

Nominal NNLO QCD + NLO EW $K_f$-factors as defined in Eq. (20) for the differential forward $Z/\gamma^* \to \ell\ell$ process in the invariant mass region $116 < m_{\ell\ell} < 150$ GeV. The $K_f$-factor is calculated as ratio of the best NNLO QCD + NLO EW prediction to the NLO QCD calculation using the MCFM/APPLGRID calculation, both using the ATLAS-epWZ12 NNLO PDF set, c.f. Section 7.1. In addition to the nominal $K_f$-factor, a full set of alternative $K$-factors is presented reflecting the following systematic variations, c.f. Tables 19 and 21. The factor $K_{FEWZ}$ uses the FEWZ 3.1.b2 NNLO QCD prediction, combined with NLO EW. The factors $K_\mu$ reflect the variation of the renormalisation and factorisations scales ($\mu_R, \mu_F$ up/down) by factors 2 and 0.5, respectively. The factors $K_{EW}$ quantify the deviation in case of using the NNLO QCD and NLO EW combination procedure as defined in Eq. (13) from the nominal prescription in Eq. (15), where the effect is symmetrised (EW up/down). The statistical uncertainty on each $K_f$-factor (stat) is obtained from the NNLO QCD calculation, while the numerical uncertainties from all other contributions is negligible.

Correction factors estimated from Powheg+Pythia6+Photos samples, c.f. Section 2.2, to convert the integrated common fiducial cross-section measurements from Born QED level, c.f. Section 6.1.2, to a "dressed" and "bare" QED FSR definition. The "dressed" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) combined with all FSR photons within a cone R, as defined in Footnote 1, of R<0.1. The "bare" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) after QED FSR losses. The factors $C_{dressed}$ ($C_{bare}$) are defined as the ratio of the dressed (bare) to the Born QED level cross sections. The statistical uncertainties are negligible on these correction factors.

Correction factors estimated from Powheg+Pythia6+Photos samples, c.f. Section 2.2, to convert the differential common fiducial $W^+ \to e^+\nu$ cross-section measurements from Born QED level, c.f. Section 6.1.2, to a "dressed" and "bare" QED FSR definition. The "dressed" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) combined with all FSR photons within a cone R, as defined in Footnote 1, of R<0.1. The "bare" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) after QED FSR losses. The factors $C_{dressed}$ ($C_{bare}$) are defined as the ratio of the dressed (bare) to the Born QED level cross sections. The statistical uncertainties (stat) are given.

Correction factors estimated from Powheg+Pythia6+Photos samples, c.f. Section 2.2, to convert the differential common fiducial $W^- \to e^-\bar{\nu}$ cross-section measurements from Born QED level, c.f. Section 6.1.2, to a "dressed" and "bare" QED FSR definition. The "dressed" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) combined with all FSR photons within a cone R, as defined in Footnote 1, of R<0.1. The "bare" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) after QED FSR losses. The factors $C_{dressed}$ ($C_{bare}$) are defined as the ratio of the dressed (bare) to the Born QED level cross sections. The statistical uncertainties (stat) are given.

Correction factors estimated from Powheg+Pythia6+Photos samples, c.f. Section 2.2, to convert the differential common fiducial $W^+ \to \mu^+\nu$ cross-section measurements from Born QED level, c.f. Section 6.1.2, to a "dressed" and "bare" QED FSR definition. The "dressed" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) combined with all FSR photons within a cone R, as defined in Footnote 1, of R<0.1. The "bare" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) after QED FSR losses. The factors $C_{dressed}$ ($C_{bare}$) are defined as the ratio of the dressed (bare) to the Born QED level cross sections. The statistical uncertainties (stat) are given.

Correction factors estimated from Powheg+Pythia6+Photos samples, c.f. Section 2.2, to convert the differential common fiducial $W^- \to \mu^-\bar{\nu}$ cross-section measurements from Born QED level, c.f. Section 6.1.2, to a "dressed" and "bare" QED FSR definition. The "dressed" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) combined with all FSR photons within a cone R, as defined in Footnote 1, of R<0.1. The "bare" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) after QED FSR losses. The factors $C_{dressed}$ ($C_{bare}$) are defined as the ratio of the dressed (bare) to the Born QED level cross sections. The statistical uncertainties (stat) are given.

Correction factors estimated from Powheg+Pythia6+Photos samples, c.f. Section 2.2, to convert the differential common fiducial central $Z/\gamma^* \to ee$ cross-section measurements from Born QED level, c.f. Section 6.1.2, to a "dressed" and "bare" QED FSR definition. The "dressed" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) combined with all FSR photons within a cone R, as defined in Footnote 1, of R<0.1. The "bare" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) after QED FSR losses. The factors $C_{dressed}$ ($C_{bare}$) are defined as the ratio of the dressed (bare) to the Born QED level cross sections. The statistical uncertainties (stat) are given.

Correction factors estimated from Powheg+Pythia6+Photos samples, c.f. Section 2.2, to convert the differential common fiducial central $Z/\gamma^* \to \mu\mu$ cross-section measurements from Born QED level, c.f. Section 6.1.2, to a "dressed" and "bare" QED FSR definition. The "dressed" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) combined with all FSR photons within a cone R, as defined in Footnote 1, of R<0.1. The "bare" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) after QED FSR losses. The factors $C_{dressed}$ ($C_{bare}$) are defined as the ratio of the dressed (bare) to the Born QED level cross sections. The statistical uncertainties (stat) are given.

Correction factors estimated from Powheg+Pythia6+Photos samples, c.f. Section 2.2, to convert the differential common fiducial forward $Z/\gamma^* \to ee$ cross-section measurements from Born QED level, c.f. Section 6.1.2, to a "dressed" and "bare" QED FSR definition. The "dressed" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) combined with all FSR photons within a cone R, as defined in Footnote 1, of R<0.1. The "bare" level is obtained from the charged final-state lepton(s) after QED FSR losses. The factors $C_{dressed}$ ($C_{bare}$) are defined as the ratio of the dressed (bare) to the Born QED level cross sections. The statistical uncertainties (stat) are given.

$\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{s}$ production ratio in $pp$ collisions at 900 GeV in $y$ intervals for ($0.25 < p_T < 0.65$), ($0.65 < p_T < 1.00$), ($1.00 < p_T < 2.50$) GeV$/c$.

Lambdabar over Lambda @ 900 GeV (0.25 < pT < 2.5) GeV/c in y intervals.

$\bar{\Lambda}$ to $\Lambda$ production ratio in $pp$ collisions at 900 GeV ($0.25 < p_T < 2.50$ GeV$/c$) in $y$ intervals.

Lambdabar over K0s @ 900 Gev (0.25 < pT < 2.5 GeV/c) in y intervals.

$\bar{\Lambda}$ over $K^{0}_{s}$ production ratio in $pp$ collisions at 900 Gev ($0.25 < p_T < 2.50$ GeV$/c$) in $y$ intervals.

Lambdabar over Lambda @ 900 Gev for (2.0 < y < 4.0) in intervals of pT.

$\bar{\Lambda}$ to $\Lambda$ production ratio in $pp$ collisions at 900 Gev for $2.0 < y < 4.0$ in intervals of $p_T$.

Lambdabar over K0s @ 900 Gev for (2.0 < y < 4.0) in intervals of pT.

$\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{s}$ production ratio in $pp$ collisions at 900 Gev for $2.0 < y < 4.0$ in intervals of $p_T$.

Lambdabar over K0s @ 900 Gev for (2.0 < y < 4.0) in intervals of pT.

$\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{s}$ production ratio in $pp$ collisions at 900 Gev ($2.0 < y < 4.0$; $0.25 < p_T < 2.50$ GeV$/c$) in rapidity loss intervals.

Lambdabar over K0s @ 900 Gev for (2.0 < y < 4.0) in intervals of pT.

$\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{s}$ production ratio in $pp$ collisions at 900 Gev ($2.0 < y < 4.0$; $0.25 < p_T < 2.50$ GeV$/c$) in rapidity loss intervals.

Lambdabar over Lambda @ 7TeV in y interals for (0.15<PT<0.65),(0.65<PT<1.00),(1.00<PT<2.50) GeV/c.

$\bar{\Lambda}$ to $\Lambda$ production ratio in $pp$ collisions at 7 TeV in $y$ intervals for ($0.15 < p_T < 0.65$), ($0.65 < p_T < 1.00$), ($1.00 < p_T < 2.50$) GeV$/c$.

Lambdabar over K0s @ 7TeV in y interals for (0.15<PT<0.65),(0.65<PT<1.00),(1.00<PT<2.50) GeV/c.

$\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{s}$ production ratio in $pp$ collisions at 7 TeV in $y$ intervals for ($0.15 < p_T < 0.65$), ($0.65 < p_T < 1.00$), ($1.00 < p_T < 2.50$) GeV$/c$.

Lambdabar over Lambda @ 7 TeV (0.15 < pT < 2.5) GeV/c in y intervals.

$\bar{\Lambda}$ to $\Lambda$ production ratio in $pp$ collisions at 7 TeV ($0.15 < p_T < 2.50$ GeV$/c$) in $y$ intervals.

Lambdabar over K0s @ 7 TeV (0.15 < pT < 2.5) GeV/c in y intervals.

$\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{s}$ production ratio in $pp$ collisions at 7 TeV ($0.15 < p_T < 2.50$ GeV$/c$) in $y$ intervals.

Lambdabar over Lambda @ 7 Tev for (2.0 < y < 4.5) in pT intervals.

$\bar{\Lambda}$ to $\Lambda$ production ratio in $pp$ collisions at 7 Tev for $2.0 < y < 4.5$ in $p_T$ intervals.

Lambdabar over K0s @ 7 Tev for (2.0 < y < 4.5) in pT intervals.

$\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{s}$ production ratio in $pp$ collisions at 7 Tev for $2.0 < y < 4.5$ in $p_T$ intervals.

Lambdabar over K0s @ 7 Tev for (2.0 < y < 4.5) in pT intervals.

$\bar{\Lambda}$ to $\Lambda$ production ratio in $pp$ collisions at 7 Tev ($2.0 < y < 4.5$; $0.15 < p_T < 2.50$ GeV$/c$) in rapidity loss intervals.

Lambdabar over K0s @ 7 Tev for (2.0 < y < 4.5) in pT intervals.

$\bar{\Lambda}$ to $K^{0}_{s}$ production ratio in $pp$ collisions at 7 Tev ($2.0 < y < 4.5$; $0.15 < p_T < 2.50$ GeV$/c$) in rapidity loss intervals.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the hadronic pseudo-top-quark $|y(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})|$ in the electron channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the leptonic pseudo-top-quark $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}})$ in the muon channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the leptonic pseudo-top-quark $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}})$ in the electron channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the leptonic pseudo-top-quark $|y(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}})|$ in the muon channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the leptonic pseudo-top-quark $|y(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}})|$ in the electron channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the pseudo-top-quark-pair $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})$ in the muon channel.The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the pseudo-top-quark-pair $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})$ in the electron channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the pseudo-top-quark-pair $|y(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})|$ in the muon channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the pseudo-top-quark-pair $|y(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})|$ in the electron channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the pseudo-top-quark-pair $m(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})$ in the muon channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the pseudo-top-quark-pair $m(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})$ in the electron channel. The results shown in this table are one of the inputs for the combined results.

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the hadronic pseudo-top-quark $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})$ after the electron and muon channel combination. The results shown in this table correspond to the results presented in figure 11(a).

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the hadronic pseudo-top-quark $|y(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})|$ after the electron and muon channel combination. The results shown in this table correspond to the results presentedin figure 12(a).

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of theleptonic pseudo-top-quark $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}})$ after the electron and muon channel combination.The results shown in this table correspond to the results presented in figure 11(b).

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertaintyas a function of the leptonic pseudo-top-quark $|y(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}})|$ after the electron and muon channel combination.The results shown in this table correspond to the results presented in figure 12(b).

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function ofthe pseudo-top-quark-pair $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})$ after the electron and muon channel combination.The results shown in this table correspond to the results presented in figure 13(a).

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the pseudo-top-quark-pair $|y(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})|$ after the electron and muon channel combination.The results shown in this table correspond to the results presented in figure 13(b).

Measured $t\bar{t}$ differential cross-section and relative uncertainty as a function of the pseudo-top-quark-pair $m(\hat{t}_{\mathrm{l}}\hat{t}_{\mathrm{h}})$after the electron and muon channel combination. The results shown in this table correspond to the results presented in figure 13(c).