$\eta$ distributions of fake tracks in minimum-bias collision events and chargino tracks in 3 TeV wino signal events. The normalization is arbitrary. The details of fake track reconstruction is described in Sect. 5.2. The fake-track distribution is shown only within the range $|\eta|<2$.

Probability of finding a fake track in an event as a function of the average number of $pp$ interactions per bunch crossing ($\left<\mu\right>$). The probabilities for the tracks reconstructed with $N_{\mathrm{layer}}^{\mathrm{hit}}=4$ (5) are shown by the open (filled) markers, and they are presented separately for the three tracker layouts, the default layout ($\#$1) in black circles, the alternative layouts of $\#$2 in magenta squares and $\#$3 in red upward triangles. The probabilities for the layout $\#$2 are shown only at $\left<\mu\right>=200$. The estimate from the mixed sample of non-diffractive and diffractive events for the default layout is shown by the blue diamond for comparison purpose.

Expected discovery significance for the wino model with 30 ab$^{-1}$ with the requirement of $N_{\mathrm{layer}}^{\mathrm{hit}}=5$. The grey (red) bands show the significance using the default (alternative) layout $\#$1 ($\#$3). The difference between the solid and hatched bands corresponds to the different pileup conditions of $\left<\mu\right>=200$ and 500. The band width corresponds to the significance variation due to the two models assumed for soft QCD processes.

Expected discovery significance for the higgsino model with 30 ab$^{-1}$ with the requirement of $N_{\mathrm{layer}}^{\mathrm{hit}}=5$. The grey (red) bands show the significance using the default (alternative) layout $\#$1 ($\#$3). The difference between the solid and hatched bands corresponds to the different pileup conditions of $\left<\mu\right>=200$ and 500. The band width corresponds to the significance variation due to the two models assumed for soft QCD processes.

Expected discovery significance for the wino model with 30 ab$^{-1}$ with the requirements of $N_{\mathrm{layer}}^{\mathrm{hit}}=5$ and a good time-fit quality. The background reduction rate with the time information is assumed to be the same for both pileup conditions. The grey (red) bands show the significance using the default (alternative) layout $\#$1 ($\#$3). The difference between the solid and hatched bands corresponds to the different pileup conditions of $\left<\mu\right>=200$ and 500. The band width corresponds to the significance variation due to the two models assumed for soft QCD processes.

Expected discovery significance for the higgsino model with 30 ab$^{-1}$ with the requirements of $N_{\mathrm{layer}}^{\mathrm{hit}}=5$ and a good time-fit quality. The background reduction rate with the time information is assumed to be the same for both pileup conditions. The grey (red) bands show the significance using the default (alternative) layout $\#$1 ($\#$3). The difference between the solid and hatched bands corresponds to the different pileup conditions of $\left<\mu\right>=200$ and 500. The band width corresponds to the significance variation due to the two models assumed for soft QCD processes.

Summary of reach for charginos using a disappearing-track signature. The FCC-hh 5$\sigma$-discovery reach assuming the alternative layout, the average number of $pp$ interactions per bunch crossing of 500, only non-diffractive soft-QCD processes and a use of the time information of the pixel detector is shown in blue. The reach for the wino scenario is obtained by extrapolating the sensitivity curve in Fig. 6. The 5$\sigma$-discovery reach and the 95% CL exclusion sensitivity are taken from [46]. The observed exclusion in the ATLAS search with 36 fb$^{-1}$ of Run 2 data [39, 47] are shown as well.

Radial distances (in mm) of the first five layers from the beam line for the three inner-tracker layouts considered in this study.

Signal acceptance for the 3 TeV wino and 1 TeV higgsino with $|\eta|<1$ for the three inner-tracker layouts. The acceptances are provided separately for the requirements of $N_{\mathrm{layer}}^{\mathrm{hit}}=4$ and 5. The alternative layout $\#$3 has significantly higher acceptance than the others because the relevant layers are located closer to the beam line, particularly for the higgsino case with $N_{\mathrm{layer}}^{\mathrm{hit}}=5$.

Signal and background yields as well as the discovery significance for the 3 TeV wino and 1 TeV higgsino with 30 ab$^{-1}$ with the requirements of $N_{\mathrm{layer}}^{\mathrm{hit}}=5$ under the pileup condition of $\left<\mu\right>=200$. The fake-track background rate is assumed to be same for both alternative layouts. The kinematic selection requirements on the leading jet $p_{T}$ and $E_{\text{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ are also given.

Signal and background yields as well as the discovery significance for the 3 TeV wino and 1 TeV higgsino with 30 ab$^{-1}$ with the requirements of $N_{\mathrm{layer}}^{\mathrm{hit}}=5$ under the pileup condition of $\left<\mu\right>=500$. The fake-track background rate is assumed to be same for both alternative layouts. The kinematic selection requirements on the leading jet $p_{T}$ and $E_{\text{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ are also given.

Expected exclusion limits in the gluino-neutralino mass plane, for the higgsino-bino GGM model with $\mu < 0$, using the merged $\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{L}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{H}$ analyses.

Observed exclusion limits in the $M_3$-$\mu$ plane, for the higgsino-bino GGM model with $\mu > 0$, using the merged $\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$ analyses.

Expected exclusion limits in the $M_3$-$\mu$ plane, for the higgsino-bino GGM model with $\mu > 0$, using the merged $\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$ analyses.

Contour of exclusion in wino production cross section from the photon+$\ell$ analysis, as a function of the wino mass parameter $m_{\tilde{W}}$. The expected limit is shown along with its $\pm 1$ and $\pm 2$ standard deviation values.

Numbers of selected data events at progressive stages of the selection, for each SR for the diphoton, photon+j and photon+$\ell$ analyses. Where no number is shown the cut was not applied.

Expected number of signal events at progressive stages of the selection, shown for points in the parameter space that typify the region for which each selection of the diphoton, photon+j and photon+$\ell$ analyses is optimized, and scaled to an integrated luminosity of $20.3\,\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$. Where no number is shown the cut was not applied.

Expected number of signal events at progressive stages of the $\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{H}$ selection, shown for data and signal Monte Carlo datasets.

Expected number of signal events at progressive stages of the $\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{L}$ selection, shown for data and signal Monte Carlo datasets.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}}$ between 1550 and 1600 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}} = 1500$ GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}}$ between 1350 and 1450 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}}$ between 1250 and 1300 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}}$ between 1150 and 1200 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}}$ between 1000 and 1100 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for $m_{\tilde{W}}$ between 650 and 800 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for $m_{\tilde{W}}$ between 400 and 600 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for $m_{\tilde{W}}$ between 100 and 400 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{H}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for combined strong and weak production across the $\mu<0$ higgsino-bino parameter space.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for combined strong and weak production across the $\mu<0$ higgsino-bino parameter space.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for combined strong and weak production across the $\mu>0$ higgsino-bino parameter space.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for combined strong and weak production across the $\mu>0$ higgsino-bino parameter space.

Acceptance-times-efficiency (a*e) for the photon+$\ell$ analysis SRs.

The total NLO+NLL strong production cross sections with uncertainties for GGM gluino-neutralino signal points for the diphoton and photon+b analyses. In the variant of the grid used in the diphoton analysis, the electroweak production cross section is negligible.

The total NLO cross sections with uncertainties for GGM wino-bino signal points, for all final states, for the diphoton analysis. The direct bino production cross section is negligible.

The NLO gaugino pair production cross sections with relative uncertainties for GGM gluino-neutralino signal points for the photon+b analysis.

The best signal region used for each signal point in the photon+b analysis.

The total NLO+NLL cross sections with uncertainties for the strong production GGM signal grid for the photon+j analysis.

The total NLO cross sections with uncertainties for the electroweak production GGM signal grid for the photon+j analysis.

The best signal region used for each signal point in the photon+j analysis.