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.

Left pannel. The vertical bars (boxes) represent the statistical (bin-to-bin systematic) uncertainties, while the horizontal bars give the bin widths. The global uncertainty (of 2.3%) is not graphically represented. The blue line represents the average for $p_T > 18$ GeV. For comparison, the LHCb measurement [10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.122002] is also shown. $ 12 < \mathrm{B} \, p_T < 70$ GeV and $ 0 < |y| < 2.4 $. Global uncertanties are not included in the table (2.3%)

Left pannel. The vertical bars (boxes) represent the statistical (bin-to-bin systematic) uncertainties, while the horizontal bars give the bin widths. The global uncertainty (of 2.3%) is not graphically represented. The blue line represents the average for $p_T > 18$ GeV. For comparison, the LHCb measurement [10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.122002] is also shown. $ 12 < \mathrm{B} \, p_T < 70$ GeV and $ 0 < |y| < 2.4 $. Global uncertanties are not included in the table (2.3%)

Left pannel. The vertical bars (boxes) represent the statistical (bin-to-bin systematic) uncertainties, while the horizontal bars give the bin widths. The global uncertainty (of 2.3%) is not graphically represented. The blue line represents the average for $p_T > 18$ GeV. For comparison, the LHCb measurement [10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.122002] is also shown. $ 12 < \mathrm{B} \, p_T < 70$ GeV and $ 0 < |y| < 2.4 $. Global uncertanties are not included in the table (2.3%)

Right pannel. The vertical bars (boxes) represent the statistical (bin-to-bin systematic) uncertainties, while the horizontal bars give the bin widths. The global uncertainty (of 2.3%) is not graphically represented. The blue line represents the average for $p_T > 18$ GeV. For comparison, the LHCb measurement [10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.122002] is also shown. $ 12 < \mathrm{B} \, p_T < 70$ GeV and $ 0 < |y| < 2.4 $. Global uncertanties are not included in the table (2.3%)

Right pannel. The vertical bars (boxes) represent the statistical (bin-to-bin systematic) uncertainties, while the horizontal bars give the bin widths. The global uncertainty (of 2.3%) is not graphically represented. The blue line represents the average for $p_T > 18$ GeV. For comparison, the LHCb measurement [10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.122002] is also shown. $ 12 < \mathrm{B} \, p_T < 70$ GeV and $ 0 < |y| < 2.4 $. Global uncertanties are not included in the table (2.3%)

Right pannel. The vertical bars (boxes) represent the statistical (bin-to-bin systematic) uncertainties, while the horizontal bars give the bin widths. The global uncertainty (of 2.3%) is not graphically represented. The blue line represents the average for $p_T > 18$ GeV. For comparison, the LHCb measurement [10.1103/PhysRevLett.124.122002] is also shown. $ 12 < \mathrm{B} \, p_T < 70$ GeV and $ 0 < |y| < 2.4 $. Global uncertanties are not included in the table (2.3%)

Left panel.The vertical bars (boxes) represent the statistical (bin-to-bin systematic) uncertainties, while the horizontal bars give the bin widths. The global uncertainty (of 4.9\%) is not graphically represented. The blue line represents the average of all the points. $ 12 < \mathrm{B} \, p_T < 70$ GeV and $ 0 < |y| < 2.4 $. Global uncertanties are not included in the table (4.9%)

Left panel.The vertical bars (boxes) represent the statistical (bin-to-bin systematic) uncertainties, while the horizontal bars give the bin widths. The global uncertainty (of 5.7%) is not graphically represented. The blue line represents the average of all the points. $ 12 < \mathrm{B} \, p_T < 70$ GeV and $ 0 < |y| < 2.4 $. Global uncertanties are not included in the table (5.7%)

Left panel.The vertical bars (boxes) represent the statistical (bin-to-bin systematic) uncertainties, while the horizontal bars give the bin widths. The global uncertainty (of 5.7%) is not graphically represented. The blue line represents the average of all the points. $ 12 < \mathrm{B} \, p_T < 70$ GeV and $ 0 < |y| < 2.4 $. Global uncertanties are not included in the table (5.7%)

Right panel.The vertical bars (boxes) represent the statistical (bin-to-bin systematic) uncertainties, while the horizontal bars give the bin widths. The global uncertainty (of 4.9\%) is not graphically represented. The blue line represents the average of all the points. $ 12 < \mathrm{B} \, p_T < 70$ GeV and $ 0 < |y| < 2.4 $. Global uncertanties are not included in the table (4.9%)

Right panel.The vertical bars (boxes) represent the statistical (bin-to-bin systematic) uncertainties, while the horizontal bars give the bin widths. The global uncertainty (of 5.7%) is not graphically represented. The blue line represents the average of all the points. $ 12 < \mathrm{B} \, p_T < 70$ GeV and $ 0 < |y| < 2.4 $. Global uncertanties are not included in the table (5.7%)

Right panel.The vertical bars (boxes) represent the statistical (bin-to-bin systematic) uncertainties, while the horizontal bars give the bin widths. The global uncertainty (of 5.7%) is not graphically represented. The blue line represents the average of all the points. $ 12 < \mathrm{B} \, p_T < 70$ GeV and $ 0 < |y| < 2.4 $. Global uncertanties are not included in the table (5.7%)

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb, divided by &#9001;TPPB&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron cross-section in pp collisions. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Charged-hadron cross-section in pp collisions. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Charged-hadron spectrum in the centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe, divided by &#9001;TAA&#9002;. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty on momentum bias is negligible at low pT; in such cases, it is omitted in the table below.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-60% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-90% for p+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Pb+Pb. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 0-5% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 5-10% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 10-20% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 20-30% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 30-40% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 40-50% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 50-60% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Nuclear modification factor in centrality interval 60-80% for Xe+Xe. The systematic uncertainties are described in the section 7 of the paper. The total systematic uncertainties are determined by adding the contributions from all relevant sources in quadrature.

Final state radiation correction used in the $\phi_{\eta}^{*}$ cross-section measurement. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.

Final state radiation correction used in the $y^{Z}-p_{T}^{Z}$ cross-section measurement. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.

Final state radiation correction used in the $y^{Z}-\phi_{\eta}^{*}$ cross-section measurement. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.

Correlation matrix of statistical uncertainty for one-dimensional $y^Z$ measurement.

Correlation matrix of statistical uncertainty for one-dimensional $p_{T}^{Z}$ measurement.

Correlation matrix of statistical uncertainty for one-dimensional $\phi_{\eta}^{*}$ measurement.

Correlation matrix of statistical uncertainty for two-dimensional $y^Z-p_{T}^{Z}$ measurement.

Correlation matrix of statistical uncertainty for two-dimensional $y^Z-\phi_{\eta}^{*}$ measurement.

Correlation matrix of efficiency uncertainty for one-dimensional $y^Z$ measurement.

Correlation matrix of efficiency uncertainty for one-dimensional $p_{T}^{Z}$ measurement.

Correlation matrix of efficiency uncertainty for one-dimensional $\phi_{\eta}^{*}$ measurement.

Correlation matrix of efficiency uncertainty for two-dimensional $y^Z-p_{T}^{Z}$ measurement.

Correlation matrix of efficiency uncertainty for two-dimensional $y^Z-\phi_{\eta}^{*}$ measurement.

Measured total $Z$-boson cross-section for different datasets. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second systematic, and the third is due to the luminosity.

Measured single differential cross-sections in interval regions of $y^{Z}$. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second systematic, and the third is due to the luminosity.

Measured single differential cross-sections in interval regions of $p_{T}^{Z}$. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second systematic, and the third is due to the luminosity.

Measured single differential cross-sections in interval regions of $\phi_{\eta}^{*}$. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second systematic, and the third is due to the luminosity.

Measured double differential cross-sections in interval regions of $y^{Z}$ and $p_{T}^{Z}$. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second systematic, and the third is due to the luminosity.

Measured double differential cross-sections in interval regions of $y^{Z}$ and $\phi_{\eta}^{*}$. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second systematic, and the third is due to the luminosity.

Systematic uncertainties in the single differential cross-sections in interval regions of $y^{Z}$, presented in percentage. The contributions from efficiency (Eff), background (BKG), final state radiation (FSR), closure test (Closure), and alignment and calibration (Alignment) are shown.

Systematic uncertainties in the single differential cross-sections in interval regions of $p_{T}^{Z}$, presented in percentage. The contributions from efficiency (Eff), background (BKG), final state radiation (FSR), closure test (Closure), and alignment and calibration (Alignment) are shown.

Systematic uncertainties in the single differential cross-sections in interval regions of $\phi_{\eta}^{*}$, presented in percentage. The contributions from efficiency (Eff), background (BKG), final state radiation (FSR), closure test (Closure), and alignment and calibration (Alignment) are shown.

Systematic uncertainties in the double differential cross-sections in interval regions of $y^{Z}$ and $p_{T}^{Z}$, presented in percentage. The contributions from efficiency (Eff), background (BKG), final state radiation (FSR), closure test (Closure), and alignment and calibration (Alignment) are shown.

Systematic uncertainties in the double differential cross-sections in interval regions of $y^{Z}$ and $\phi_{\eta}^{*}$, presented in percentage. The contributions from efficiency (Eff), background (BKG), final state radiation (FSR), closure test (Closure), and alignment and calibration (Alignment) are shown.

$K^-$ (a), invariant yields as a function of $m_T-m_0$ for various rapidity regions in 10--40\% central Au+Au collisions at ${\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = \mathrm{3\,GeV}}$. Statistics and systematic uncertainties are added quadratic here for plotting. Solid and dashed black lines depict $m_T$ exponential function fits to the measured data points with arbitrate scaling factors in each rapidity windows.

$\phi$ meson (b) invariant yields as a function of $m_T-m_0$ for various rapidity regions in 10--40\% central Au+Au collisions at ${\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = \mathrm{3\,GeV}}$. Statistics and systematic uncertainties are added quadratic here for plotting. Solid and dashed black lines depict $m_T$ exponential function fits to the measured data points with arbitrate scaling factors in each rapidity windows.

$\Xi^-$ (c) invariant yields as a function of $m_T-m_0$ for various rapidity regions in 10--40\% central Au+Au collisions at ${\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = \mathrm{3\,GeV}}$. Statistics and systematic uncertainties are added quadratic here for plotting. Solid and dashed black lines depict $m_T$ exponential function fits to the measured data points with arbitrate scaling factors in each rapidity windows.

$K^-$ (a), invariant yields as a function of $m_T-m_0$ for various rapidity regions in 40--60\% central Au+Au collisions at ${\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = \mathrm{3\,GeV}}$. Statistics and systematic uncertainties are added quadratic here for plotting. Solid and dashed black lines depict $m_T$ exponential function fits to the measured data points with arbitrate scaling factors in each rapidity windows.

$\phi$ meson (b) invariant yields as a function of $m_T-m_0$ for various rapidity regions in 40--60\% central Au+Au collisions at ${\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = \mathrm{3\,GeV}}$. Statistics and systematic uncertainties are added quadratic here for plotting. Solid and dashed black lines depict $m_T$ exponential function fits to the measured data points with arbitrate scaling factors in each rapidity windows.

Rapidity density distributions of $K^-$ (squares), $p_T$-integrated yields $dN/dy$ in 0--10\% (a), 10--40\% (b) and 40--60\% central (c) Au+Au collisions at ${\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = \mathrm{3\,GeV}}$. %The full symbols show the measured data, while the open ones are data reflected with respect to $y=0$ in the center-of-mass frame. Solid lines depict Gaussian function fits to the data points.

Rapidity density distributions of $\phi$ meson (circles) $p_T$-integrated yields $dN/dy$ in 0--10\% (a), 10--40\% (b) and 40--60\% central (c) Au+Au collisions at ${\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = \mathrm{3\,GeV}}$. %The full symbols show the measured data, while the open ones are data reflected with respect to $y=0$ in the center-of-mass frame. Solid lines depict Gaussian function fits to the data points.

Rapidity density distributions of $\Xi^-$ (diamonds) $p_T$-integrated yields $dN/dy$ in 0--10\% (a), 10--40\% (b) and 40--60\% central (c) Au+Au collisions at ${\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = \mathrm{3\,GeV}}$. %The full symbols show the measured data, while the open ones are data reflected with respect to $y=0$ in the center-of-mass frame. Solid lines depict Gaussian function fits to the data points.

$\phi/K^-$ (a) and $\phi/\Xi^-$ (b) ratio as a function of collision energy, $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$. The solid black circles show the measurements presented here in 0-10\% centrality bin, while empty markers in black or grey are used for data from various other energies and/or collision systems. The grey solid line represents a THERMUS calculation based on the Grand Canonical Ensemble (GCE) while the dotted lines depict calculations based on the Canonical Ensemble (CE) with different parameters of strangeness correlation radius ($r_c$). The green dashed line, green shaded band and the solid red line show transport model calculations from the public versions $\mathrm{UrQMD}^{1}$, modified $\mathrm{UrQMD}^{2}$ and SMASH, respectively.

Azimuthal correlation distribution between heavy-flavour decay electrons and charged hadrons, scaled by the number of electrons in EMCal triggered events in the electron transverse momentum range 4.5-6 GeV/c.

Relative beauty contribution to the heavy-flavour electron yield obtained with the method based on the track impact parameter.

Relative beauty contribution to the heavy-flavour electron yield obtained with the method based on the track impact parameter.

Relative beauty contribution to the heavy-flavour electron yield obtained from the method based on the azimuthal correlation of heavy-flavour decay electrons and charged tracks.

Relative beauty contribution to the heavy-flavour electron yield obtained from the method based on the azimuthal correlation of heavy-flavour decay electrons and charged tracks.

The $p_{\rm T}$-differential inclusive cross section of electrons (multiplied by $10^3$ for readability) from beauty hadron decays using the electron-hadron azimuthal correlation method.

The pT-differential inclusive cross section of electrons from beauty hadron decays using the electron-hadron azimuthal correlation method.

The $p_{\rm T}$-differential inclusive cross section of electrons (multiplied by $10^3$ for readability) from beauty hadron decays. A 1.9% normalization uncertainty not shown.

The pT-differential inclusive cross section of electrons from beauty hadron decays. A 1.9% normalization uncertainty not shown.

Inclusive bbbar production cross section per rapidity unit measured in mid-rapidity.

Inclusive bbbar production cross section per rapidity unit measured.

Total bbbar production cross section.

Total bbbar production cross section.

Single-differential production cross-sections for nonprompt $J/\psi$ mesons as a function of $p_\text{T}$. The first uncertainties are statistical, the second are correlated systematic uncertainties shared between intervals, and the last are uncorrelated systematic uncertainties.

Single-differential production cross-sections for prompt $J/\psi$ mesons as a function of $y$. The first uncertainties are statistical, the second are correlated systematic uncertainties shared between intervals, and the last are uncorrelated systematic uncertainties.

Single-differential production cross-sections for nonprompt $J/\psi$ mesons as a function of $y$. The first uncertainties are statistical, the second are correlated systematic uncertainties shared between intervals, and the last are uncorrelated systematic uncertainties.

Fraction of nonprompt $J/\psi$ mesons (in \%) in ($p_\text{T},y$) intervals. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.

Nuclear modification factor $R_{p\text{Pb}}$ for prompt $J/\psi$ mesons as a function of $y$. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.

Nuclear modification factor $R_{p\text{Pb}}$ for nonprompt $J/\psi$ mesons as a function of $y$. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.

Cross-section ratios between 8 TeV and 5 TeV measurements for prompt $J/\psi$ mesons as a function of $p_\text{T}$. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.

Cross-section ratios between 8 TeV and 5 TeV measurements for prompt $J/\psi$ mesons as a function of $y$. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.

Cross-section ratios between 13 TeV and 5 TeV measurements for prompt $J/\psi$ mesons as a function of $p_\text{T}$. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.

Cross-section ratios between 13 TeV and 5 TeV measurements for prompt $J/\psi$ mesons as a function of $y$. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.

Cross-section ratios between 8 TeV and 5 TeV measurements for nonprompt $J/\psi$ mesons as a function of $p_\text{T}$. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.

Cross-section ratios between 8 TeV and 5 TeV measurements for nonprompt $J/\psi$ mesons as a function of $y$. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.

Cross-section ratios between 13 TeV and 5 TeV measurements for nonprompt $J/\psi$ mesons as a function of $p_\text{T}$. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.

Cross-section ratios between 13 TeV and 5 TeV measurements for nonprompt $J/\psi$ mesons as a function of $y$. The first uncertainty is statistical and the second is systematic.

Relative changes of cross-sections (in \%), for a polarisation of $\lambda_{\theta}=-0.2$ rather than zero, in ($p_\text{T},y$) intervals.

Relative changes of cross-sections (in \%), for a polarisation of $\lambda_{\theta}=-1$ rather than zero, in ($p_\text{T},y$) intervals.

Relative changes of cross-sections (in \%), for a polarisation of $\lambda_{\theta}=+1$ rather than zero, in ($p_\text{T},y$) intervals.

Nuclear modification factor of $\Upsilon(1\mathrm{S})$ as a function of the average number of participants $\langle N_{\mathrm{part}} \rangle$ or as a function of the collision centrality.

Nuclear modification factor of $\Upsilon(2\mathrm{S})$ as a function of the average number of participants $\langle N_{\mathrm{part}} \rangle$ or as a function of the collision centrality.

Ratio of $\Upsilon(2\mathrm{S})$ and $\Upsilon(1\mathrm{S})$ yields (cf. equation 2 in the article for the definition) as a function of the average number of participants $\langle N_{\mathrm{part}} \rangle$ or as a function of the collision centrality. The global uncertainty is the quadratic sum of the branching ratio uncertainties.

Relative nuclear modification factor or double yield ratio between $\Upsilon(2\mathrm{S})$ and $\Upsilon(1\mathrm{S})$ as a function of the average number of participants $\langle N_{\mathrm{part}} \rangle$ or as a function of the collision centrality. The global uncertainty corresponds to the systematic uncertainty on the cross-section ratio in proton–proton collisions.

Nuclear modification factor of $\Upsilon(1\mathrm{S})$ as a function of transverse momentum for the 0–90% centrality interval.

Nuclear modification factor of $\Upsilon(1\mathrm{S})$ as a function of rapidity for the 0–90% centrality interval.

Nuclear modification factor of $\Upsilon(2\mathrm{S})$ as a function of rapidity for the 0–90% centrality interval.

Interpolated production cross sections and cross-section ratio for $\Upsilon(1\mathrm{S}) \rightarrow \mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ and $\Upsilon(2\mathrm{S}) \rightarrow \mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ in proton–proton collisions, integrated over the rapidity interval 2.5–4.0 and $p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 15 GeV/$c$. Results used for the determination of the integrated nuclear modification factors and of the nuclear modification factors as a function of centrality (Figures 4 and 5 (right)).

Interpolated $p_{\mathrm{T}}$-differential cross section for $\Upsilon(1\mathrm{S}) \rightarrow \mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ in proton–proton collisions. Results used for the determination of the nuclear modification factor of $\Upsilon(1\mathrm{S})$ as a function of its transverse momentum (Figure 6).

Interpolated rapidity-differential cross section for $\Upsilon(1\mathrm{S}) \rightarrow \mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ in proton–proton collisions. Results used for the determination of the nuclear modification factor of $\Upsilon(1\mathrm{S})$ as a function of rapidity (Figure 7).

Interpolated rapidity-differential cross section for $\Upsilon(2\mathrm{S}) \rightarrow \mu^{+}\mu^{-}$ in proton–proton collisions. Results used for the determination of the nuclear modification factor of $\Upsilon(2\mathrm{S})$ as a function of rapidity (Figure 7).

The FSR correction applied as a function of $\phi ^ * _ \eta$ for electrons.

The FSR correction applied as a function of the boson transverse momentum.

The measured differential cross-sections as a function of the boson rapidity for muons. The first uncertainty is due to the size of the dataset, the second is due to experimental systematic uncertainties, and the third is due to the luminosity.

The measured differential cross-sections as a function of the boson rapidity for electrons. The first uncertainty is due to the size of the dataset, the second is due to experimental systematic uncertainties, and the third is due to the luminosity.

The measured differential cross-sections as a function of $\phi ^ * _ \eta$ for muons. The first uncertainty is due to the size of the dataset, the second is due to experimental systematic uncertainties, and the third is due to the luminosity.

The measured differential cross-sections as a function of $\phi ^ * _ \eta$ for electrons. The first uncertainty is due to the size of the dataset, the second is due to experimental systematic uncertainties, and the third is due to the luminosity.

The measured differential cross-sections as a function of pT . The first uncertainty is due to the size of the dataset, the second is due to experimental systematic uncertainties, and the third is due to the luminosity.

The correlation matrix for the differential cross-section measurement as a function of Z boson rapidity, for the dimuon final state, excluding the luminosity uncertainty, which is fully correlated between bins.

The correlation matrix for the differential cross-section measurements as a function of the Z boson rapidity, for the dielectron final state, excluding the luminosity uncertainty, which is fully correlated between bins.

The correlation matrix for the differential cross-section measurement as a function of $\phi ^ * _ \eta$ , for the dimuon final state, excluding the luminosity uncertainty, which is fully correlated between bins.

The correlation matrix for the differential cross-section measurements as a function of $\phi ^ * _ \eta$ , for the dielectron final state, excluding the luminosity uncertainty, which is fully correlated between bins.

The correlation matrix for the differential cross-section measurements as a function of boson pT , for the dimuon final state, excluding the luminosity uncertainty, which is fully correlated between bins.

Measured rapidity differential cross section of coherent Psi(2S) photoproduction in Pb–Pb UPCs events.

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=1$ for $0-20$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{d}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=1$ for $0-20$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2$ for $0-20$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{d}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2$ for $0-20$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3$ for $0-20$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{d}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3$ for $0-20$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0$ for $0-20$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{d}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0$ for $0-20$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=1$ for $0-20$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{d}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=1$ for $0-20$% central

$B_{2}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}/A$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0$ for $0-20$% central

$B_{2}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}/A$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=1$ for $0-20$% central

$B_{2}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}/A$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2$ for $0-20$% central

$B_{2}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}/A$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3$ for $0-20$% central

$B_{2}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}/A$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0$ for $0-20$% central

$B_{2}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}/A$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=1$ for $0-20$% central

$\langle f\rangle$ versus $m_{\mathrm{T}}/A$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0$ for $0-20$% central

$\langle f\rangle$ versus $m_{\mathrm{T}}/A$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=1$ for $0-20$% central

$\langle f\rangle$ versus $m_{\mathrm{T}}/A$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2$ for $0-20$% central

$\langle f\rangle$ versus $m_{\mathrm{T}}/A$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3$ for $0-20$% central

$\langle f\rangle$ versus $m_{\mathrm{T}}/A$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0$ for $0-20$% central

$\langle f\rangle$ versus $m_{\mathrm{T}}/A$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=1$ for $0-20$% central

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=130\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}$ versus $y$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=130\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{\pi}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=130\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{\pi}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{K}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$, $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{K}^{+}$ versus $\mathrm{Centrality}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{K}^{-}$, $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$, $\mathrm{p}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{\pi}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{K}^{+}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$, $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}$ versus $y$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{K}^{+}\ (\mathrm{interpolated})$, $\mu_{\mathrm{B}}$ versus $\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$, $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$, $\mathrm{K}^{+}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

J/psi-->e+e- invariant yield in Cu+Cu collisions as a function of p_T at mid-rapidity for the 20-40 centrality range. The statistical and systematic uncertainties vary point-to-point and are listed for each measured value. An additional global systematic uncertainty is provided in each column heading, which applies to all data points per column.

J/PSI yield versus transverse momentum PT, at mid rapidity : -0.35<y<0.35, for a centrality range of 40-60%.

J/psi-->e+e- invariant yield in Cu+Cu collisions as a function of p_T at mid-rapidity for the 40-60 centrality range. The statistical and systematic uncertainties vary point-to-point and are listed for each measured value. An additional global systematic uncertainty is provided in each column heading, which applies to all data points per column.

J/PSI yield versus transverse momentum PT, at mid rapidity : -0.35<y<0.35, for a centrality range of 60-94%.

J/psi-->e+e- invariant yield in Cu+Cu collisions as a function of p_T at mid-rapidity for the 60-94 centrality range. The statistical and systematic uncertainties vary point-to-point and are listed for each measured value. An additional global systematic uncertainty is provided in each column heading, which applies to all data points per column.

J/PSI yield versus transverse momentum PT, at forward rapidity : absolute value of y belongs to [1.22.2], for a centrality range of 0-20%.

J/psi-->mu+mu- invariant yield in Cu+Cu collisions as a function of p_T at forward rapidity for the 0-20, 20-40, 40-60 and 60-94 centrality ranges. The statistical and systematic uncertainties vary point-to-point and are listed for each measured value. An additional global systematic uncertainty is provided in each column heading, which applies to all data points per column.

J/PSI yield versus transverse momentum PT, at forward rapidity : absolute value of y belongs to [1.22.2], for a centrality range of 20-40%.

J/psi-->e+e- average momentum squared in Cu+Cu collisions as a function of N_part at forward rapidity (p_T integrated). The statistical and systematic uncertainties vary point-to-point and are listed for each measured value.

J/PSI yield versus transverse momentum PT, at forward rapidity : absolute value of y belongs to [1.22.2], for a centrality range of 40-60%.

J/psi-->mu+mu- average momentum squared in Cu+Cu collisions as a function of N_part at forward rapidity (p_T integrated). The statistical and systematic uncertainties vary point-to-point and are listed for each measured value.

J/PSI yield versus transverse momentum PT, at forward rapidity : absolute value of y belongs to [1.22.2], for a centrality range of 60-94%.

J/psi-->mu+mu- and J/psi-->e+e- nuclear modification in Cu+Cu collisions as a function of p_T at forward and mid-rapidity for the 0-20 centrality range. The statistical and systematic uncertainties vary point-to-point and are listed for each measured value. An additional global systematic uncertainty is provided in each column heading, which applies to all data points per column.

Mean PT^2 versus Npart, number of participants, at mid rapidity : -0.35<y<0.35.

J/psi-->mu+mu- and J/psi-->e+e- nuclear modification in Cu+Cu collisions as a function of y at forward and mid-rapidity for the 0-20 centrality range. The statistical and systematic uncertainties vary point-to-point and are listed for each measured value. An additional global systematic uncertainty is provided in each column heading, which applies to all data points per column.

Mean PT^2 versus Npart, number of participants, at forward rapidity : absolute value of y belongs to [1.22.2].

J/psi-->e+e- nuclear modification in Cu+Cu collisions as a function of N_part at mid-rapidity for the 0-20 centrality range. The statistical and systematic uncertainties vary point-to-point and are listed for each measured value. An additional global systematic uncertainty is provided in each column heading, which applies to all data points per column.

Nuclear modification factor RAA versus transverse momentum PT at mid rapidity : -0.35<y<0.35, for the 0-20% most central events.

J/psi-->mu+mu- nuclear modification in Cu+Cu collisions as a function of N_part at forward rapidity for the 0-20 centrality range. The statistical and systematic uncertainties vary point-to-point and are listed for each measured value. An additional global systematic uncertainty is provided in each column heading, which applies to all data points per column.

Nuclear modification factor RAA versus transverse momentum PT at forward rapidity : absolute value of y belongs to [1.22.2], for the 0-20% most central events.

J/psi-->mu+mu- in Cu+Cu collisions as a function of $N_{part}$ at forward rapidity expressed as a ratio with respect to J/psi-->e+e- nuclear modification at mid-rapidity. The statistical and systematic uncertainties vary point-to-point and are listed for each measured value. An additional global systematic uncertainty is provided in each column heading, which applies to all data points per column.

Nuclear modification factor RAA versus rapidity, for the 0-20% most central events.

Nuclear modification factor RAA versus number of participants, at mid rapidity : -0.35<y<0.35.

Nuclear modification factor RAA versus number of participants, at forward rapidity : absolute value of y belongs to [1.22.2].

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 $|y(\bar t)|$.

Differential fiducial cross section (without the acceptance correction) for the DY process measured in the muon channel, as a function of $p_{\textrm{T}}$ for $15<m_{\mu\mu}<60$ GeV. The quoted error is the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The global normalisation uncertainty of 3.5% is listed separately.

Differential fiducial cross section (without the acceptance correction) for the DY process measured in the muon channel, as a function of $p_{\textrm{T}}$ for $60<m_{\mu\mu}<120$ GeV. The quoted error is the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The global normalisation uncertainty of 3.5% is listed separately.

Differential fiducial cross section (without the acceptance correction) for the DY process measured in the muon channel, as a function of $\phi^*$ for $15<m_{\mu\mu}<60$ GeV. The quoted error is the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The global normalisation uncertainty of 3.5% is listed separately.

Differential fiducial cross section (without the acceptance correction) for the DY process measured in the muon channel, as a function of $\phi^*$ for $60<m_{\mu\mu}<120$ GeV. The quoted error is the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The global normalisation uncertainty of 3.5% is listed separately.

Integrated fiducial cross section for the DY process measured in the muon channel. The quoted error is the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The global normalisation uncertainty of 3.5% is listed separately.

Differential cross section for the DY process measured in the muon channel, as a function of dimuon invariant mass. The quoted error is the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The global normalisation uncertainty of 3.5% is listed separately.

Differential cross section for the DY process measured in the muon channel, as a function of rapidity in the centre-of-mass frame for $15<m_{\mu\mu}<60$ GeV. The quoted error is the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The global normalisation uncertainty of 3.5% is listed separately.

Differential cross section for the DY process measured in the muon channel, as a function of rapidity in the centre-of-mass frame for $60<m_{\mu\mu}<120$ GeV. The quoted error is the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The global normalisation uncertainty of 3.5% is listed separately.

Differential cross section for the DY process measured in the muon channel, as a function of $p_{\textrm{T}}$ for $15<m_{\mu\mu}<60$ GeV. The quoted error is the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The global normalisation uncertainty of 3.5% is listed separately.

Differential cross section for the DY process measured in the muon channel, as a function of $p_{\textrm{T}}$ for $60<m_{\mu\mu}<120$ GeV. The quoted error is the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The global normalisation uncertainty of 3.5% is listed separately.

Differential cross section for the DY process measured in the muon channel, as a function of $\phi^*$ for $15<m_{\mu\mu}<60$ GeV. The quoted error is the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The global normalisation uncertainty of 3.5% is listed separately.

Differential cross section for the DY process measured in the muon channel, as a function of $\phi^*$ for $60<m_{\mu\mu}<120$ GeV. The quoted error is the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The global normalisation uncertainty of 3.5% is listed separately.

Integrated cross section for the DY process measured in the muon channel. The quoted error is the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The global normalisation uncertainty of 3.5% is listed separately.

Forward-backward ratios for $15<m_{\mu\mu}<60$ GeV. Quoted uncertainties are the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Forward-backward ratios for $60<m_{\mu\mu}<120$ GeV. Quoted uncertainties are the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties, excluding integrated luminosity, as a function of dimuon invariant mass.

Correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties, excluding integrated luminosity, as a function of rapidity in the centre-of-mass frame for $15<m_{\mu\mu}<60$ GeV.

Correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties, excluding integrated luminosity, as a function of rapidity in the centre-of-mass frame for $60<m_{\mu\mu}<120$ GeV.

Correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties, excluding integrated luminosity, as a function of $p_{\textrm{T}}$ for $15<m_{\mu\mu}<60$ GeV.

Correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties, excluding integrated luminosity, as a function of $p_{\textrm{T}}$ for $60<m_{\mu\mu}<120$ GeV.

Correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties, excluding integrated luminosity, as a function of $\phi^*$ for $15<m_{\mu\mu}<60$ GeV.

Correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties, excluding integrated luminosity, as a function of $\phi^*$ for $60<m_{\mu\mu}<120$ GeV.

Correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties, excluding integrated luminosity, as a function of rapidity in the centre-of-mass frame, putting together low and high masses. Each bin is labeled lm_i or hm_i, where lm stands for $15<m_{\mu\mu}<60$ GeV, hm stands for $60<m_{\mu\mu}<120$ GeV, and i is the corresponding bin number in rapidity in the centre-of-mass frame. The global normalisation uncertainty of 3.5% is not included. Data from Figure [3, 4, 4].

Correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties, excluding integrated luminosity, as a function of $p_{\textrm{T}}$, putting together low and high masses. Each bin is labeled lm_i or hm_i, where lm stands for $15<m_{\mu\mu}<60$ GeV, hm stands for $60<m_{\mu\mu}<120$ GeV, and i is the corresponding bin number in $p_{\textrm{T}}$. The global normalisation uncertainty of 3.5% is not included. Data from Figure [3, 4, 4].

Correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties, excluding integrated luminosity, as a function of $\phi^*$, putting together low and high masses. Each bin is labeled lm_i or hm_i, where lm stands for $15<m_{\mu\mu}<60$ GeV, hm stands for $60<m_{\mu\mu}<120$ GeV, and i is the corresponding bin number in $\phi^*$. The global normalisation uncertainty of 3.5% is not included. Data from Figure [3, 4, 4].

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$, $m_{\mathrm{T}}-m_{0}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}\frac{2}{N_{\mathrm{part}}}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}\frac{2}{N_{\mathrm{part}}}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}\frac{2}{N_{\mathrm{part}}}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}\frac{2}{N_{\mathrm{part}}}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}\frac{2}{N_{\mathrm{part}}}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}\frac{2}{N_{\mathrm{part}}}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}\frac{2}{N_{\mathrm{part}}}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}\frac{2}{N_{\mathrm{part}}}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}+\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}+\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}+\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}+\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}+\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}+\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}+\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}+\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}+\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}+\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}+\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}+\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}+\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}+\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}+\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}+\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}+\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}+\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}+\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}+\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{K}^{+}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$, $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{K}^{+}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$, $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{+}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{+}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$, $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$, $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{\pi}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{\pi}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $N_{\mathrm{part}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{+}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{+}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{+}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{+}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{+}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{+}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{+}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{K}^{+}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Cu}-\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}$ at $\sqrt{s}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}$ at $\sqrt{s}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\frac{\mathrm{\pi}^{+}+\mathrm{\pi}^{-}}{2}$ in $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}$ at $\sqrt{s}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}$ at $\sqrt{s}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}$ at $\sqrt{s}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.9-1.1$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.05-3.15$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.15-3.25$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.4-3.6$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=-0.2-0.0$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.0-0.2$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.7-0.9$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.9-1.1$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.05-3.15$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.15-3.25$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.4-3.6$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=-0.15-0.15$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.6-0.8$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.8-1.0$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2.55-2.65$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2.65-2.75$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.15-3.25$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.25-3.35$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=-0.15-0.15$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.6-0.8$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.8-1.0$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2.55-2.65$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2.65-2.75$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.15-3.25$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.25-3.35$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\mathrm{\pi}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$,$\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{K}^{+}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$,$\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}$ versus $y$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$,$\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\mathrm{K}^{+}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$,$\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$,$\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\mathrm{K}^{+}/\mathrm{K}^{-}$ versus $\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$,$\mathrm{K}^{-}$,$\overline{\mathrm{p}}$,$\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\mathrm{K}^{+}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$,$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$,$\mathrm{K}^{-}$,$\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$,$\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$,$\overline{\mathrm{p}}$,$\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$T_{\mathrm{K^{+}}}$,$T_{\mathrm{K^{-}}}$ versus $\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$,$\mathrm{K}^{-}$,$\mathrm{p}$,$\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{h}^{-}$,$\mathrm{h}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}$,$\mathrm{d}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $\eta=3.2$

$R_{\mathrm{dA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\frac{h^{+}+h^{-}}{2}$ in $\mathrm{d}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $\eta=0$

$R_{\mathrm{dA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\frac{h^{+}+h^{-}}{2}$ in $\mathrm{d}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $\eta=1$

$R_{\mathrm{dA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{h}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{d}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $\eta=2.2$

$R_{\mathrm{dA}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{h}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{d}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $\eta=3.2$

$R_{\mathrm{CP}}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\frac{h^{+}+h^{-}}{2}$,$\frac{h^{+}+h^{-}}{2}$,$\mathrm{h}^{-}$,$\mathrm{h}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{d}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $\eta=True$ for $0-20-30-50$% central

The $y_{cm}$ dependences of $v_{1}$ for protons, deuterons and tritons averaged over the $p_{t}$ interval $1.0 < p_{t} < 1.5$ GeV$/c$ in semi-central ($20 - 30$ %) Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{{s}_{NN}}=2.4$ GeV.

The $y_{cm}$ dependences of $v_{3}$ for protons, deuterons and tritons averaged over the $p_{t}$ interval $1.0 < p_{t} < 1.5$ GeV$/c$ in semi-central ($20 - 30$ %) Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{{s}_{NN}}=2.4$ GeV.

The $y_{cm}$ dependences of $v_{5}$ for protons, deuterons and tritons averaged over the $p_{t}$ interval $1.0 < p_{t} < 1.5$ GeV$/c$ in semi-central ($20 - 30$ %) Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{{s}_{NN}}=2.4$ GeV.

The $p_{t}$ dependence of $v_{2}$ for protons, deuterons and tritons in the rapidity interval $|y_{cm}| < 0.05$ in semi-central ($20 - 30$ %) $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ collisions at $\sqrt{{s}_{NN}}=2.4$ GeV.

The $p_{t}$ dependence of $v_{4}$ for protons, deuterons and tritons in the rapidity interval $|y_{cm}| < 0.05$ in semi-central ($20 - 30$ %) $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ collisions at $\sqrt{{s}_{NN}}=2.4$ GeV.

The $p_{t}$ dependence of $v_{6}$ for protons, deuterons and tritons in the rapidity interval $|y_{cm}| < 0.05$ in semi-central ($20 - 30$ %) $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ collisions at $\sqrt{{s}_{NN}}=2.4$ GeV.

The $y_{cm}$ dependences of $v_{2}$ for protons, deuterons and tritons averaged over the $p_{t}$ interval $1.0 < p_{t} < 1.5$ GeV$/c$ in semi-central ($20 - 30$ %) Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{{s}_{NN}}=2.4$ GeV.

The $y_{cm}$ dependences of $v_{4}$ for protons, deuterons and tritons averaged over the $p_{t}$ interval $1.0 < p_{t} < 1.5$ GeV$/c$ in semi-central ($20 - 30$ %) Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{{s}_{NN}}=2.4$ GeV.

The $y_{cm}$ dependences of $v_{6}$ for protons, deuterons and tritons averaged over the $p_{t}$ interval $1.0 < p_{t} < 1.5$ GeV$/c$ in semi-central ($20 - 30$ %) Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{{s}_{NN}}=2.4$ GeV.

The ratio $v_{4}/v_{2}^{2}$ for protons in $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ collisions at $\sqrt{{s}_{NN}}=2.4$ GeV as a function of $p_{t}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y_{cm}| < 0.05$) for three different centralities.

The ratio $v_{4}/v_{2}^{2}$ for deuterons in $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ collisions at $\sqrt{{s}_{NN}}=2.4$ GeV as a function of $p_{t}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y_{cm}| < 0.05$) for three different centralities.

The ratio $v_{4}/v_{2}^{2}$ for tritons in $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ collisions at $\sqrt{{s}_{NN}}=2.4$ GeV as a function of $p_{t}$ at mid-rapidity ($|y_{cm}| < 0.05$) for three different centralities.

The ratio $v_{4}/v_{2}^{2}$ for tritons in Au+Au collisions $\sqrt{{s}_{NN}}=2.4$ GeV averaged over the $p_{t}$ interval $1.0 < p_{t} < 1.5$ GeV$/c$ for three different centralities.

The ratio $v_{4}/v_{2}^{2}$ for tritons in Au+Au collisions $\sqrt{{s}_{NN}}=2.4$ GeV averaged over the $p_{t}$ interval $1.0 < p_{t} < 1.5$ GeV$/c$ for three different centralities.

The ratio $v_{4}/v_{2}^{2}$ for tritons in Au+Au collisions $\sqrt{{s}_{NN}}=2.4$ GeV averaged over the $p_{t}$ interval $1.0 < p_{t} < 1.5$ GeV$/c$ for three different centralities.

$K^{+}$ signal and the corresponding background fit for the region covering mid-rapidity and $m_{t}−m_{0}$ between 25 and 50 $MeV/c^{2}$.

$K^{+}$ signal and the corresponding background fit for the region covering mid-rapidity and $m_{t}−m_{0}$ between 25 and 50 $MeV/c^{2}$.

$K^{+}$ signal and the corresponding background fit for the region covering mid-rapidity and $m_{t}−m_{0}$ between 25 and 50 $MeV/c^{2}$.

$K^{-}$ signal and the corresponding background fit for the region covering mid-rapidity and $m_{t}−m_{0}$ between 50 and 75 $MeV/c^{2}$.

$K^{-}$ signal and the corresponding background fit for the region covering mid-rapidity and $m_{t}−m_{0}$ between 50 and 75 $MeV/c^{2}$.

$K^{-}$ signal and the corresponding background fit for the region covering mid-rapidity and $m_{t}−m_{0}$ between 50 and 75 $MeV/c^{2}$.

$K^{+}K^{-}$ invariant mass distribution for the mid-rapidity region and $m_{t}−m_{0}$ between 0 and 100 $MeV/c^{2}$ after subtraction of the background.

$K^{+}K^{-}$ invariant mass distribution for the mid-rapidity region and $m_{t}−m_{0}$ between 0 and 100 $MeV/c^{2}$ after subtraction of the background.

$K^{+}K^{-}$ invariant mass distribution for the mid-rapidity region and $m_{t}−m_{0}$ between 0 and 100 $MeV/c^{2}$ after subtraction of the background.

Rapidity distributions of $K^{-}$ and $\phi$ as well as extracted inverse slope parameters obtained from the Boltzmann fits to the the $m_{t}$ spectra.

Rapidity distributions of $K^{-}$ and $\phi$ as well as extracted inverse slope parameters obtained from the Boltzmann fits to the the $m_{t}$ spectra.

Rapidity distributions of $K^{-}$ and $\phi$ as well as extracted inverse slope parameters obtained from the Boltzmann fits to the the $m_{t}$ spectra.

$K^{-}$ transverse-mass spectrum around mid-rapidity

$K^{-}$ transverse-mass spectrum around mid-rapidity

$K^{-}$ transverse-mass spectrum around mid-rapidity

Multiplicity ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ as function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ for central heavy-ion collisions.

Multiplicity ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ as function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ for central heavy-ion collisions.

Multiplicity ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ as function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ for central heavy-ion collisions.

Multiplicities and effective inverse slopes $T_{eff}$ at mid-rapidity for given centrality classes.

Multiplicities and effective inverse slopes $T_{eff}$ at mid-rapidity for given centrality classes.

Multiplicities and effective inverse slopes $T_{eff}$ at mid-rapidity for given centrality classes.

Multiplicity ratios for given centrality classes.

Multiplicity ratios for given centrality classes.

Multiplicity ratios for given centrality classes.

Reduced transverse mass ($m_{t}-m_{0}$) spectra of $K^{+}$ for the 0-40% most central events.

Reduced transverse mass ($m_{t}-m_{0}$) spectra of $K^{+}$ for the 0-40% most central events.

Reduced transverse mass ($m_{t}-m_{0}$) spectra of $K^{+}$ for the 0-40% most central events.

Reduced transverse mass ($m_{t}-m_{0}$) spectra of $K^{-}$ for the 0-40% most central events.

Reduced transverse mass ($m_{t}-m_{0}$) spectra of $K^{-}$ for the 0-40% most central events.

Reduced transverse mass ($m_{t}-m_{0}$) spectra of $K^{-}$ for the 0-40% most central events.

Reduced transverse mass ($m_{t}-m_{0}$) spectra of $\phi$ for the 0-40% most central events.

Reduced transverse mass ($m_{t}-m_{0}$) spectra of $\phi$ for the 0-40% most central events.

Reduced transverse mass ($m_{t}-m_{0}$) spectra of $\phi$ for the 0-40% most central events.

Rapidity distribution of $K^{+}$ for the 0-40% most central events.

$\Upsilon(1S)$ production cross-section in $p$Pb and Pb$p$, as a function of $y^*$. The uncertainty is the sum in quadrature of the statistical and systematic components.

$\Upsilon(2S)$ production cross-section in $p$Pb and Pb$p$, as a function of $p_{T}$. The uncertainty is the sum in quadrature of the statistical and systematic components.

$\Upsilon(2S)$ production cross-section in $p$Pb and Pb$p$, as a function of $y^*$. The uncertainty is the sum in quadrature of the statistical and systematic components.

Scaled $pp$ differential cross-section in $p_{T}$ at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=8.16$ TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic, which includes the systematic uncertainty from the $pp$ measurement and that estimated by changing the interpolation function.

Scaled $pp$ differential cross-section in $y$ at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=8.16$ TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic, which includes the systematic uncertainty from the $pp$ measurement and that estimated by changing the interpolation function.

$\Upsilon(1S)$ nuclear modification factor, $R_{p{\rm Pb}}^{\Upsilon(1S)}$, in $p$Pb and Pb$p$ as a function of $p_{T}$ integrated over $y^*$ in the range $1.5 < y^* < 4.0$ for $p$Pb and $-5.0 < y^* < -2.5$ for Pb$p$. The quoted uncertainties are the sum in quadrature of the statistical and systematic components.

$\Upsilon(1S)$ nuclear modification factor, $R_{p{\rm Pb}}^{\Upsilon(1S)}$, in $p$Pb and Pb$p$ as a function of $y^*$ integrated over $p_{T}$ in the range $0 < p_{T} < 25$ GeV$/c$. The quoted uncertainties are the sum in quadrature of the statistical and systematic components.

$\Upsilon(2S)$ nuclear modification factor, $R_{p{\rm Pb}}^{\Upsilon(2S)}$, in $p$Pb and Pb$p$ as a function of $p_{T}$ integrated over $y^*$ in the range $1.5 < y^* < 4.0$ for $p$Pb and $-5.0 < y^* < -2.5$ for Pb$p$. The quoted uncertainties are the sum in quadrature of the statistical and systematic components.

$\Upsilon(2S)$ nuclear modification factor, $R_{p{\rm Pb}}^{\Upsilon(2S)}$, in $p$Pb and Pb$p$ as a function of $y^*$ integrated over $p_{T}$ in the range $0 < p_{T} < 25$ GeV$/c$. The quoted uncertainties are the sum in quadrature of the statistical and systematic components.

$\Upsilon(1S)$ forward-to-backward ratio, $R_{{\rm FB}}^{\Upsilon(1S)}$, as a function of $p_{T}$ integrated over $\vert y^* \vert$ in the range $2.5 < \vert y^* \vert < 4.0$. The quoted uncertainties are the sum in quadrature of the statistical and systematic components.

$\Upsilon(1S)$ forward-to-backward ratio, $R_{{\rm FB}}^{\Upsilon(1S)}$, as a function of $\vert y^* \vert$ integrated over $p_{T}$ in the range $0 < p_{T} < 25$ GeV/c. The quoted uncertainties are the sum in quadrature of the statistical and systematic components.

$\Upsilon(2S)$ to $\Upsilon(1S)$ ratio, in $p$Pb and Pb$p$ as a function of $p_{T}$ integrated over $y^*$ in the range $1.5 < y^* < 4.0$ for $p$Pb and $-5.0 < y^* < -2.5$ for Pb$p$. The quoted uncertainties are the sum in quadrature of the statistical and systematic components.

$\Upsilon(2S)$ to $\Upsilon(1S)$ ratio, in $p$Pb and Pb$p$ as a function of $y^*$ integrated over $p_{T}$ in the range $0 < p_{T} < 25$ GeV/c. The quoted uncertainties are the sum in quadrature of the statistical and systematic components.

$\Upsilon(1S)$ to non-prompt $J/\psi$, in $p$Pb and Pb$p$ as a function of $y^*$ integrated over $p_{T}$ in the range $0 < p_{T} < 25$ GeV/c. The quoted uncertainties are the sum in quadrature of the statistical and systematic components.

Example of $\Lambda$ signal for 0-40% most central events, over mixed-event background for the bin $-0.05 < y_{cm} < 0.05$ and reduced transverse masses between $100-150 MeV/c^{2}$.

Reduced transverse mass ($m_{t}-m_{0}$) spectra of $K^{0}_{S}$ for the 0-40% most central events.

Reduced transverse mass ($m_{t}-m_{0}$) spectra of $K^{0}_{S}$ for the 0-40% most central events. NOTE: The spectra are not scaled by $1/N_{Events}$! To compare the data, divide by $N_{Events} = 2.1997626 x 10^{9}$

Reduced transverse mass ($m_{t}-m_{0}$) spectra of $\Lambda$ for the 0-40% most central events.

Reduced transverse mass ($m_{t}-m_{0}$) spectra of $\Lambda$ for the 0-40% most central events. NOTE: The spectra are not scaled by $1/N_{Events}$! To compare the data, divide by $N_{Events} = 2.1997626 x 10^{9}$

Rapidity distribution of $K^{0}_{S}$

Rapidity distribution of $K^{0}_{S}$

Rapidity distribution of $\Lambda$

Rapidity distribution of $\Lambda$

Compilation of mid-rapidity yields for central Au+Au collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ of $K^{0}_{S}$ and $\Lambda$.

Compilation of mid-rapidity yields for central Au+Au collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ of $K^{0}_{S}$ and $\Lambda$.

Multiplicities per mean number of participants $Mult/\langle A_{Part}\rangle$ as a function of $\langle A_{Part}\rangle$

Multiplicities per mean number of participants $Mult/\langle A_{Part}\rangle$ as a function of $\langle A_{Part}\rangle$

Multiplicities per mean number of participants $Mult/\langle A_{Part}\rangle$ as a function of $\langle A_{Part}\rangle$ for $K^{0}_{S}$

Multiplicities per mean number of participants $Mult/\langle A_{Part}\rangle$ as a function of $\langle A_{Part}\rangle$ for $K^{0}_{S}$

Multiplicities per mean number of participants $Mult/\langle A_{Part}\rangle$ as a function of $\langle A_{Part}\rangle$ for $\Lambda$

Multiplicities per mean number of participants $Mult/\langle A_{Part}\rangle$ as a function of $\langle A_{Part}\rangle$ for $\Lambda$

Comparison of the shape of the rapidity distribution of $K^{0}_{S}$ to various transport model versions.

Comparison of the shape of the rapidity distribution of $K^{0}_{S}$ to various transport model versions.

Comparison of the shape of the rapidity distribution of $\Lambda$ to various transport model versions.

Comparison of the shape of the rapidity distribution of $\Lambda$ to various transport model versions.

Comparison of the shape of the $p_{t}$-spectra for $\pm0.15$ rapidity units around mid-rapidity of $K^{0}_{S}$ to various transport model versions.

Comparison of the shape of the $p_{t}$-spectra for $\pm0.15$ rapidity units around mid-rapidity of $K^{0}_{S}$ to various transport model versions.

Comparison of the shape of the $p_{t}$-spectra for $\pm0.15$ rapidity units around mid-rapidity of $\Lambda$ to various transport model versions.

Comparison of the shape of the $p_{t}$-spectra for $\pm0.15$ rapidity units around mid-rapidity of $\Lambda$ to various transport model versions.

Differential yield of $K^{0}_{S}$ as function of rapdidity and reduced transverse mass for the four centrality classes.

Differential yield of $K^{0}_{S}$ as function of rapdidity and reduced transverse mass for the four centrality classes. NOTE: The spectra are not scaled by $1/N_{Events}$! To compare the data, divide by $N_{Events} = 5.64247975 x 10^{8} (0 - 10\%)$, $5.85743394 x 10^{8} (10 - 20\%)$, $5.76369451 x 10^{8} (20 - 30\%)$ or $4.73401752 x 10^{8} (30 - 40\%)$

Differential yield of $\Lambda$ as function of rapdidity and reduced transverse mass for the four centrality classes.

Differential yield of $\Lambda$ as function of rapdidity and reduced transverse mass for the four centrality classes. NOTE: The spectra are not scaled by $1/N_{Events}$! To compare the data, divide by $N_{Events} = 5.64247975 x 10^{8} (0 - 10\%)$, $5.85743394 x 10^{8} (10 - 20\%)$, $5.76369451 x 10^{8} (20 - 30\%)$ or $4.73401752 x 10^{8} (30 - 40\%)$

$K^{0}_{S}$ and $\Lambda$ multiplicities in full phase space and inverse slopes at mid-rapidity $T_{Eff}$ for a given centrality.

$K^{0}_{S}$ and $\Lambda$ multiplicities in full phase space and inverse slopes at mid-rapidity $T_{Eff}$ for a given centrality.

Value of the parameter $\alpha$ extracted for $K^{+}$, $K^{-}$, $K^{0}_{S}$, $\Lambda$ and $\Phi$, as displayed in Figure 5 - Global $Mult/\langle A_{Part}\rangle$ Fit

Value of the parameter $\alpha$ extracted for $K^{+}$, $K^{-}$, $K^{0}_{S}$, $\Lambda$ and $\Phi$, as displayed in Figure 5 - Global $Mult/\langle A_{Part}\rangle$ Fit

$^3\overline{\mathrm{H}} /\,^3\mathrm{H}$ ratio in $\mathrm{INEL}>0$ p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = 5.02$

Transverse momentum spectra obtained from the average of $^3\mathrm{He}$ and $^3\overline{\mathrm{He}}$ for $\mathrm{INEL}>0$ events in p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = 5.02$

Transverse momentum spectra obtained from the average of $^3\mathrm{He}$ and $^3\overline{\mathrm{He}}$ for events in 0$-$10% multiplicity class in p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = 5.02$

Transverse momentum spectra obtained from the average of $^3\mathrm{He}$ and $^3\overline{\mathrm{He}}$ for events in 10$-$20% multiplicity class in p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = 5.02$

Transverse momentum spectra obtained from the average of $^3\mathrm{He}$ and $^3\overline{\mathrm{He}}$ for events in 20$-$40% multiplicity class in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = 5.02$

Transverse momentum spectra obtained from the average of $^3\mathrm{He}$ and $^3\overline{\mathrm{He}}$ for events in 40$-$100% multiplicity class in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = 5.02$

Mean transverse momentum obtained from the average of $^3\mathrm{He}$ and $^3\overline{\mathrm{He}}$ as a function of the mean charged-particle multiplicity density in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = 5.02$ TeV

$(^3\mathrm{He} +\,^3\overline{\mathrm{He}}) / (\mathrm{p} + \overline{\mathrm{p}})$ ratio in p$-$Pb as a function of the mean charged-particle multiplicity density

$(^3\mathrm{H} +\,^3\overline{\mathrm{H}}) / (\mathrm{p} + \overline{\mathrm{p}})$ ratio in p$-$Pb as a function of the mean charged-particle multiplicity density

Coalescence parameter $B_3$ calculated using the average of $\mathrm{INEL}>0$ $^3\mathrm{He}$ and $^3\overline{\mathrm{He}}$ yields

Coalescence parameter $B_3$ calculated using the average of $\mathrm{INEL}>0$ $^3\mathrm{H}$ and $^3\overline{\mathrm{H}}$ yields

Ratio of (anti-)$^3$H and (anti-)$^3$He yields

Coalescence parameter $B_3$ calculated using the average of $^3\mathrm{He}$ and $^3\overline{\mathrm{He}}$ for $\mathrm{INEL}>0$ events in p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = 5.02$

Coalescence parameter $B_3$ calculated using the average of $^3\mathrm{He}$ and $^3\overline{\mathrm{He}}$ for events in 0$-$10% multiplicity class in p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = 5.02$

Coalescence parameter $B_3$ calculated using the average of $^3\mathrm{He}$ and $^3\overline{\mathrm{He}}$ for events in 10$-$20% multiplicity class in p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = 5.02$

Coalescence parameter $B_3$ calculated using the average of $^3\mathrm{He}$ and $^3\overline{\mathrm{He}}$ for events in 20$-$40% multiplicity class in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = 5.02$

Coalescence parameter $B_3$ calculated using the average of $^3\mathrm{He}$ and $^3\overline{\mathrm{He}}$ for events in 40$-$100% multiplicity class in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = 5.02$

Integrated production yield obtained from the average of $^3\mathrm{He}$ and $^3\overline{\mathrm{He}}$ corrected for the spin degeneracy factor $(2J +1)$ for minimum-bias p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = 5.02$

Upper limit on the integrated production yield of $^4\overline{\mathrm{He}}$ at 90$\%$ confidence level corrected for the spin degeneracy factor $(2J +1)$ for minimum-bias p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = 5.02$

Integrated production yield obtained from the average of $^3\mathrm{He}$ and $^3\overline{\mathrm{He}}$ for the different multiplicity classes and $\mathrm{INEL} > 0$ p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = 5.02$

Integrated production yield obtained from the average of $^3\mathrm{H}$ and $^3\overline{\mathrm{H}}$ for $\mathrm{INEL} > 0$ p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = 5.02$

Double-differential cross section times the dimuon branching fraction of the Y(2S) meson for different ranges of pT in bins of |y| and for the full |y| < 1.2 range, for the unpolarized decay hypothesis. The global uncertainty in the integrated luminosity of 2.3% is not included in the systematic uncertainties.

Double-differential cross section times the dimuon branching fraction of the Y(3S) meson for different ranges of pT in bins of |y| and for the full |y| < 1.2 range, for the unpolarized decay hypothesis. The global uncertainty in the integrated luminosity of 2.3% is not included in the systematic uncertainties.

Multiplicative scaling factors to obtain the J/psi differential cross sections for different polarization scenarios (Lambda_{Theta} = +1, +0.10, -1) from the unpolarized cross section measurements given in Table 1.

Multiplicative scaling factors to obtain the psi(2S) differential cross sections for different polarization scenarios (Lambda_{Theta} = +1, +0.03, -1) from the unpolarized cross section measurements given in Table 2.

Multiplicative scaling factors to obtain the Y(1S) differential cross sections for different polarization scenarios (Lambda_{Theta} = +1, k, -1) from the unpolarized cross section measurements given in Table 3. The parameter k corresponds to a linear interpolation of the CMS measured value as a function of pT for pT < 50 GeV. For pT > 50 GeV, where no measurements exist, k is taken as the average of all the measured values for pT < 50 GeV.

Multiplicative scaling factors to obtain the Y(2S) differential cross sections for different polarization scenarios (Lambda_{Theta} = +1, k, -1) from the unpolarized cross section measurements given in Table 3. The parameter k corresponds to a linear interpolation of the CMS measured value as a function of pT for pT < 50 GeV. For pT > 50 GeV, where no measurements exist, k is taken as the average of all the measured values for pT < 50 GeV.

Multiplicative scaling factors to obtain the Y(3S) differential cross sections for different polarization scenarios (Lambda_{Theta} = +1, k, -1) from the unpolarized cross section measurements given in Table 3. The parameter k corresponds to a linear interpolation of the CMS measured value as a function of pT for pT < 50 GeV. For pT > 50 GeV, where no measurements exist, k is taken as the average of all the measured values for pT < 50 GeV.

Ratio of differential cross section times branching fractions of the prompt psi(2S) to J/psi mesons assuming unpolarized productions as a function of pT for |y| < 1.2.

Ratios of differential cross section times branching fractions of the prompt Y(2S) to Y(1S) and Y(3S) to Y(1S) mesons assuming unpolarized productions as a function of pT for |y| < 1.2.

pT-differential invariant yield of charged pions in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-differential invariant yield of charged kaons in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-differential invariant yield of charged kaons in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-differential invariant yield of charged kaons in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-differential invariant yield of charged kaons in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-differential invariant yield of k0s in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-differential invariant yield of k0s in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-differential invariant yield of k0s in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-differential invariant yield of k0s in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-differential invariant yield of protons+antiprotons in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-differential invariant yield of protons+antiprotons in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-differential invariant yield of protons+antiprotons in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-differential invariant yield of protons+antiprotons in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-differential invariant yield of lambdas+antilambdas in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-differential invariant yield of lambdas+antilambdas in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-differential invariant yield of lambdas+antilambdas in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-differential invariant yield of lambdas+antilambdas in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-dependent charged kaon to charged pion production ratios in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-dependent charged kaon to charged pion production ratios in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-dependent charged kaon to charged pion production ratios in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-dependent charged kaon to charged pion production ratios in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-dependent proton+antiproton to charged pion production ratios in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-dependent proton+antiproton to charged pion production ratios in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-dependent proton+antiproton to charged pion production ratios in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-dependent proton+antiproton to charged pion production ratios in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-dependent lambda+antilambda to k0s production ratios in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-dependent lambda+antilambda to k0s production ratios in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-dependent lambda+antilambda to k0s production ratios in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

pT-dependent lambda+antilambda to k0s production ratios in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

Mean transverse momentum of lambdas+antilambdas in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

Mean transverse momentum of lambdas+antilambdas in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

Mean transverse momentum of protons+antiprotons in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

Mean transverse momentum of protons+antiprotons in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

Mean transverse momentum of k0s in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

Mean transverse momentum of k0s in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

Mean transverse momentum of charged kaons in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

Mean transverse momentum of charged kaons in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

Mean transverse momentum of charged pions in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

Mean transverse momentum of charged pions in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

Integrated production ratios in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

Integrated production ratios in pPb collisions with centre-of-mass energy/nucleon=5.02 TeV.

Integrated production yield of pions in pPb collisions at sqrts 5.02 TeV.

Integrated production yield of charged kaons in pPb collisions at sqrts 5.02 TeV.

Integrated production yield of K0S in pPb collisions at sqrts 5.02 TeV.

Integrated production yield of protons+antiprotons in pPb collisions at sqrts 5.02 TeV.

Integrated production yield of lambda+antilambda in pPb collisions at sqrts 5.02 TeV.

Transverse mass $m_T$ spectrum at midrapidity of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 158 GeV/c. $m_0$ is the PDG mass of the $\phi$ meson.

Transverse mass $m_T$ spectrum at midrapidity of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 80 GeV/c. $m_0$ is the PDG mass of the $\phi$ meson.

Dependence of the slope parameter $T$ of the transverse momentum spectrum on rapidity $y$, of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 158 GeV/c.

Dependence of the slope parameter $T$ of the transverse momentum spectrum on rapidity $y$, of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 80 GeV/c.

Dependence of the width $\sigma_y$ of the rapidity distributions on $p_T$, of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 158 GeV/c.

Dependence of the width $\sigma_y$ of the rapidity distributions on $p_T$, of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 80 GeV/c.

Rapidity spectrum of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 158 GeV/c.

Rapidity spectrum of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 80 GeV/c.

Rapidity spectrum of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 40 GeV/c.

Energy dependence of ratios of total yields of $\phi$ mesons to mean total yields of pions produced in in minimum bias p+p collisions at CERN SPS energies.

Energy dependence of double ratios of total yields of $\phi$ mesons to mean total yields of pions in central Pb+Pb collisions over minimum bias p+p collisions at CERN SPS energies.

Energy dependence of total yields of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at CERN SPS energies.

Energy dependence of midrapidity yields of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at CERN SPS energies.

Widths of rapidity distributions of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at CERN SPS energies, as a function of beam rapidity.

Ratios of B+ differential production cross sections at 13 TeV and at 7 TeV as a function of |yB| for 10 < ptB < 100 GeV or 17 < ptB < 100 GeV. The calculations from FONLL and PYTHIA are provided as well.

B+ differential production cross sections DSIG/DPT for |yB|< 1.45 or |yB|< 2.1, at 13 TeV. The calculations from FONLL and PYTHIA are provided.

B+ differential production cross sections DSIG/DETARAP for 10 < ptB < 100 GeV or 17 < ptB < 100 GeV, at 13 TeV. The calculations from FONLL and PYTHIA are provided.

B+ production cross section for the phase-space region of 10 <= pTB < 17 GeV and |yB| < 1.45, and 17 <= pTB < 100 GeV and |yB| < 2.1. The calculations from FONLL and PYTHIA are provided.

The cross section measurement as a function of the inclusive jet multiplicity, for jet multiplicities of up to 7.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the transverse momentum of the first leading jet.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the transverse momentum of the first leading jet.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the transverse momentum of the second leading jet.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the transverse momentum of the second leading jet.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the transverse momentum of the third leading jet.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the transverse momentum of the third leading jet.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the transverse momentum of the fourth leading jet.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the transverse momentum of the fourth leading jet.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of jets (HT) for events with one or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of jets (HT) for events with one or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of jets (HT) for events with two or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of jets (HT) for events with two or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of jets (HT) for events with three or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of jets (HT) for events with three or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of jets (HT) for events with four or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of jets (HT) for events with four or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the transverse momentum of the dijet system of the two highest pT jets for events with two or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the transverse momentum of the dijet system of the two highest pT jets for events with two or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the transverse momentum of the dijet system of the two highest pT jets for events with three or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the transverse momentum of the dijet system of the two highest pT jets for events with three or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the transverse momentum of the dijet system of the two highest pT jets for events with four or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the transverse momentum of the dijet system of the two highest pT jets for events with four or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the dijet invariant mass of the two highest pT jets for events with two or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the dijet invariant mass of the two highest pT jets for events with two or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the dijet invariant mass of the two highest pT jets for events with three or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the dijet invariant mass of the two highest pT jets for events with three or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the dijet invariant mass of the two highest pT jets for events with four or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the dijet invariant mass of the two highest pT jets for events with four or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the absolute value of the pseudorapidity of the first leading jet.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the absolute value of the pseudorapidity of the first leading jet.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the absolute value of the pseudorapidity of the second leading jet.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the absolute value of the pseudorapidity of the second leading jet.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the absolute value of the pseudorapidity of the third leading jet.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the absolute value of the pseudorapidity of the third leading jet.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the absolute value of the pseudorapidity of the fourth leading jet.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the absolute value of the pseudorapidity of the fourth leading jet.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the rapidity difference between the two highest pT jets for events with two or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the rapidity difference between the two highest pT jets for events with two or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the rapidity difference between the two highest pT jets for events with three or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the rapidity difference between the two highest pT jets for events with three or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the rapidity difference between the two highest pT jets for events with four or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the rapidity difference between the two highest pT jets for events with four or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the rapidity difference between the first and the third highest pT jets for events with three or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the rapidity difference between the first and the third highest pT jets for events with three or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the rapidity difference between the second and the third highest pT jets for events with three or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the rapidity difference between the second and the third highest pT jets for events with three or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the rapidity difference between the most forward and the most backward jets for events with two or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the rapidity difference between the most forward and the most backward jets for events with two or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the rapidity difference between the most forward and the most backward jets for events with three or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the rapidity difference between the most forward and the most backward jets for events with three or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the rapidity difference between the most forward and the most backward jets for events with four or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the rapidity difference between the most forward and the most backward jets for events with four or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the azimuthal angle separation between the two highest pT jets for events with two or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the azimuthal angle separation between the two highest pT jets for events with two or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the azimuthal angle separation between the most forward and the most backward jets for events with two or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the azimuthal angle separation between the most forward and the most backward jets for events with two or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of DeltaR separation between the two highest pT jets for events with two or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of DeltaR separation between the two highest pT jets for events with two or more jets.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the azimuthal angle separation between the first leading jet and the muon.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the azimuthal angle separation between the first leading jet and the muon.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the azimuthal angle separation between the second leading jet and the muon.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the azimuthal angle separation between the second leading jet and the muon.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the azimuthal angle separation between the third leading jet and the muon.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the azimuthal angle separation between the third leading jet and the muon.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the azimuthal angle separation between the fourth leading jet and the muon.

The differential cross section measurement as a function of the azimuthal angle separation between the fourth leading jet and the muon.

Average number of jets as a function of HT for events with one or more jets.

Average number of jets as a function of HT for events with one or more jets.

Average number of jets as a function of HT for events with two or more jets.

Average number of jets as a function of HT for events with two or more jets.

Average number of jets as a function of the rapidity difference between the two highest pT jets for events with two or more jets.

Average number of jets as a function of the rapidity difference between the two highest pT jets for events with two or more jets.

Average number of jets as a function of the rapidity difference between the most forward and the most backward jets for events with two or more jets.

Average number of jets as a function of the rapidity difference between the most forward and the most backward jets for events with two or more jets.

Differential cross-sections multiplied by dimuon branching fractions for $\Upsilon$(1S), $\Upsilon$(2S) and $\Upsilon$(3S) states versus $p_T$ integrated over $y$ between 2.0 and 4.5.

Differential cross-sections multiplied by dimuon branching fractions for $\Upsilon$(1S), $\Upsilon$(2S) and $\Upsilon$(3S) states versus $y$ integrated over $p_T$ from 0 to 15 GeV/c.

Ratios of double-differential cross-sections times dimuon branching fractions for $\Upsilon$(2S) to $\Upsilon$(1S).

Ratios of double-differential cross-sections times dimuon branching fractions for $\Upsilon$(3S) to $\Upsilon$(1S).

Ratios of differential cross-sections times dimuon branching fractions versus $p_T$ over $y$ for $\Upsilon$(2S) to $\Upsilon$(1S) and $\Upsilon$(3S) to $\Upsilon$(1S).

Ratios of differential cross-sections times dimuon branching fractions versus $y$ over $p_T$ for $\Upsilon$(2S) to $\Upsilon$(1S) and $\Upsilon$(3S) to $\Upsilon$(1S).

The cross-section ratios between 13 TeV and 8 TeV in different bins of $p_T$ and $y$ for $\Upsilon$(1S).

The cross-section ratios between 13 TeV and 8 TeV in different bins of $p_T$ and $y$ for $\Upsilon$(2S).

The cross-section ratios between 13 TeV and 8 TeV in different bins of $p_T$ and $y$ for $\Upsilon$(3S).

Ratios of differential cross-sections between 13 TeV and 8 TeV measurements versus $p_T$ over $y$ for $\Upsilon$(1S), $\Upsilon$(2S) and $\Upsilon$(3S).

Ratios of differential cross-sections between 13 TeV and 8 TeV measurements versus $y$ over $p_T$ for $\Upsilon$(1S), $\Upsilon$(2S) and $\Upsilon$(3S).

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.6-0.8$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.8-1.0$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=1.0-1.2$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=1.2-1.4$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2.1-2.3$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2.4-2.6$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.0-3.1$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.1-3.2$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.2-3.3$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.3-3.4$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.4-3.66$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=-0.1-0.0$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.0-0.1$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.4-0.6$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.6-0.8$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.8-1.0$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=1.0-1.2$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=1.2-1.4$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2.1-2.3$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2.4-2.6$ for $0-5$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.0-3.1$ for $0-5$% central