The two-photon cross section as a function of the photon virtualities Qi**2. H ere Q1 is the virtuality w.r.t the electron vertex, and Q2 w.r.t the positron vertex. Data are given both before and after radiative corrections.

The two-photon cross section as a function of W, the invariant mas of the vir tual GAMMA*GAMMA* system. Data are given both before and after radiative corrections.

The two-photon cross section as a function of LN(W**2/Q1*Q2). Data are given both before and after radiative corrections.

No description provided.

x spectra using JETSET as model in efficiency corrections.

x spectra using HERWIG as model in efficiency corrections.

LN(1/X) distribution using average of JETSET and HERWIG in efficiency corrections.

x spectra using JETSET as model in efficiency corrections.

x spectra using HERWIG as model in efficiency corrections.

LN(1/X) distribution using average of JETSET and HERWIG in efficiency corrections.

Corrected production rates from the etaprime --> rho0 gamma decay mode. Extrapolation to full x range.

Differential cross section for inclusive omega production from the omega --> pi+ pi- p0 decay mode data. The mean x values are the appropriate x position to plot the data according to the method of Lafferty et al (NIM A 355(95)541).

Differential cross section for inclusive omega production from the omega --> pi+ pi- p0 decay mode data. The mean x values are the appropriate x position to plot the data according to the method of Lafferty et al (NIM A 355(95)541).

Differential cross section for inclusive etaprime production from the etaprime --> pi+ pi- eta decay mode data. The mean x values are the appropriate x position to plot the data according to the method of Lafferty et al (NIM A 355(95)541).

Differential cross section for inclusive etaprime production from the etaprime --> pi+ pi- eta decay mode data. The mean x values are the appropriate x position to plot the data according to the method of Lafferty et al (NIM A 355(95)541).

Differential cross section for inclusive etaprime production from the etaprime --> rho0 gamma decay mode data. The mean x values are the appropriate x position to plot the data according to the method of Lafferty et al (NIM A 355(95)541).

Differential cross section for inclusive etaprime production from the etaprime --> rho0 gamma decay mode data. The mean x values are the appropriate x position to plot the data according to the method of Lafferty et al (NIM A 355(95)541).

Differential cross section for inclusive etaprime production obtained by combining the two etaprime decay modes.

Differential cross section for inclusive etaprime production obtained by combining the two etaprime decay modes.

The cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ integrated over each $\sqrt{\tau}$-$x_F$ cell as a function of $x_F$ for $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.24-0.27. The $\Upsilon$ region has been excluded. The integrated luminosity is $L = (8.58 \pm 0.53)\times 10^{37}$ [cm$^2$/W nucleus]$^{-1}$. Note that these data have been re-analysed by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects (see Tables 11-19 of this record).

No description provided.

The cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ integrated over each $\sqrt{\tau}$-$x_F$ cell as a function of $x_F$ for $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.27-0.30. The $\Upsilon$ region has been excluded. The integrated luminosity is $L = (8.58 \pm 0.53)\times 10^{37}$ [cm$^2$/W nucleus]$^{-1}$. Note that these data have been re-analysed by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects (see Tables 11-19 of this record).

No description provided.

The cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ integrated over each $\sqrt{\tau}$-$x_F$ cell as a function of $x_F$ for $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.30-0.33. The $\Upsilon$ region has been excluded. The integrated luminosity is $L = (8.58 \pm 0.53)\times 10^{37}$ [cm$^2$/W nucleus]$^{-1}$. Note that these data have been re-analysed by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects (see Tables 11-19 of this record).

No description provided.

The cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ integrated over each $\sqrt{\tau}$-$x_F$ cell as a function of $x_F$ for $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.33-0.36. The $\Upsilon$ region has been excluded. The integrated luminosity is $L = (8.58 \pm 0.53)\times 10^{37}$ [cm$^2$/W nucleus]$^{-1}$. Note that these data have been re-analysed by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects (see Tables 11-19 of this record).

No description provided.

The cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ integrated over each $\sqrt{\tau}$-$x_F$ cell as a function of $x_F$ for $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.36-0.39. The $\Upsilon$ region has been excluded. The integrated luminosity is $L = (8.58 \pm 0.53)\times 10^{37}$ [cm$^2$/W nucleus]$^{-1}$. Note that these data have been re-analysed by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects (see Tables 11-19 of this record).

No description provided.

The cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ integrated over each $\sqrt{\tau}$-$x_F$ cell as a function of $x_F$ for $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.39-0.42. The $\Upsilon$ region has been excluded. The integrated luminosity is $L = (8.58 \pm 0.53)\times 10^{37}$ [cm$^2$/W nucleus]$^{-1}$. Note that these data have been re-analysed by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects (see Tables 11-19 of this record).

No description provided.

The cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ integrated over each $\sqrt{\tau}$-$x_F$ cell as a function of $x_F$ for $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.54-0.60. The $\Upsilon$ region has been excluded. The integrated luminosity is $L = (8.58 \pm 0.53)\times 10^{37}$ [cm$^2$/W nucleus]$^{-1}$. Note that these data have been re-analysed by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects (see Tables 11-19 of this record).

No description provided.

The cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ integrated over each $\sqrt{\tau}$-$x_F$ cell as a function of $x_F$ for $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.60-0.66. The $\Upsilon$ region has been excluded. The integrated luminosity is $L = (8.58 \pm 0.53)\times 10^{37}$ [cm$^2$/W nucleus]$^{-1}$. Note that these data have been re-analysed by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects (see Tables 11-19 of this record).

No description provided.

The cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ integrated over each $\sqrt{\tau}$-$x_F$ cell as a function of $x_F$ for $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.66-0.72. The $\Upsilon$ region has been excluded. The integrated luminosity is $L = (8.58 \pm 0.53)\times 10^{37}$ [cm$^2$/W nucleus]$^{-1}$. Note that these data have been re-analysed by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects (see Tables 11-19 of this record).

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.21-0.24 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.24-0.27 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.27-0.30 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.30-0.33 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.33-0.36 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.36-0.39 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.39-0.42 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.54-0.63 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.63-0.72 interval for muon pair production in 194 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. Note that the numbers given here are different from the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>) and are a result of a re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects. See, for example, Freudenreich, <a href="https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217751X90001586">Int.J.Mod.Phys. A19 (1990) 3643</a>.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.18-0.21 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.21-0.24 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.24-0.27 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.27-0.30 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.30-0.33 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.33-0.36 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.45-0.48 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.48-0.51 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.51-0.54 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.54-0.63 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

The differential cross section ${\rm d}^2\sigma/{\rm d}\sqrt{\tau}{\rm d}x$ as a function of $x$ in the $\sqrt{\tau}$ = 0.63-0.72 interval for muon pair production in 286 GeV $\pi^-$-tungsten interactions as measured by the CERN-NA10 experiment. The errors quoted are statistical only and no backgrounds have been subtracted. The systematic errors are dominated by the uncertainties in the flux (4%), in the efficiencies (5%), and in the absorption cross section for W. These data complement those given at 194 GeV but did not appear in the paper (Betev et al., <a href="https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01550243">Z.Phys. C28 (1985) 9</a>). The numbers here are the result of the re-analysis by the NA10 experimenters using a better estimate of Fermi motion effects.

Differential cross section DSIG/DX for the two values of longitudinal polarization of the electron beam.

Differential cross section DSIG/DY for the two values of longitudinal polarization of the electron beam.

Values of the differential cross section DSIG/DQ**2 with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlation between cross section bins.

Values of the differential cross section DSIG/DX with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlation between cross section bins.

Values of the differential cross section DSIG/DY with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlation between cross section bins.

Values of the differential cross section DSIG/DQ**2 with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlation between cross section bins.

Values of the differential cross section DSIG/DX with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlation between cross section bins.

Values of the differential cross section DSIG/DY with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlation between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section for 3 values of longitudinal polarization of the electron beam for Q**2 = 280 GeV**2.

Values of the reduced cross section for 3 values of longitudinal polarization of the electron beam for Q**2 = 530 GeV**2.

Values of the reduced cross section for 3 values of longitudinal polarization of the electron beam for Q**2 = 950 GeV**2.

Values of the reduced cross section for 3 values of longitudinal polarization of the electron beam for Q**2 = 1700 GeV**2.

Values of the reduced cross section for 3 values of longitudinal polarization of the electron beam for Q**2 = 3000 GeV**2.

Values of the reduced cross section for 3 values of longitudinal polarization of the electron beam for Q**2 = 5300 GeV**2.

Values of the reduced cross section for 3 values of longitudinal polarization of the electron beam for Q**2 = 9500 GeV**2.

Values of the reduced cross section for 3 values of longitudinal polarization of the electron beam for Q**2 = 17000 GeV**2.

Values of the reduced cross section for 3 values of longitudinal polarization of the electron beam for Q**2 = 30000 GeV**2.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Values of the reduced cross section with detailed statistical and systematic errors.. The first DSYS is the uncorrelated systematic error and the second is the calorimeter energy scale uncertainty which has significant correlationS between cross section bins.

Differential J/$\psi$ production cross section at $\sqrt{s}=2.76$ TeV. J/$\psi$ production cross section at $\sqrt{s}=2.76$ TeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second one is $y$-correlated, the third one is uncorrelated. Polarization-related uncertainties are not included. The value for $-0.9<y<0.9$ refers to J/$\psi\rightarrow {\rm e}^+{\rm e}^-$, the remaining values to J/$\psi\rightarrow \mu^+\mu^-$.

INTERCEPT AND SLOPE OF D(SIG)/DT FOR A FIT OVER -T = MAX(MIN,0.02) TO 0.4 GEV**2.

NO TMIN CORRECTION HAS BEEN MADE.

INTERCEPT AND SLOPE OF D(SIG)/DT FOR A FIT OVER -T = MAX(MIN,0.02) TO 0.4 GEV**2.

GOTTFRIED-JACKSON SYSTEM.

HELICITY SYSTEM.

ADAIR SYSTEM.

GOTTFRIED-JACKSON SYSTEM.

HELICITY SYSTEM.

ADAIR SYSTEM.

THREE WAYS OF DEFINING AND EXTRACTING THE RHO0 CROSS SECTION FROM DIPION PRODUCTION. SODING MODEL ERRORS DO NOT INCLUDE ANY SYSTEMATIC MODEL UNCERTAINTIES. INTERCEPT AND SLOPE FROM FITS TO D(SIG)/DT OVER -T < 0.4 GEV**2. AUTHORS ALSO GIVE A TWO-PARAMETER EXPONENTIAL FIT.

No description provided.

USING THE PARAMETRIZATION TECHNIQUE TO SEPARATE DELTA CROSS SECTIONS AND PHASE SPACE BACKGROUND FROM RHO0 PRODUCTION. P33 PHASE SHIFT RATHER THAN CONVENTIONAL BREIT-WIGNER PARAMETRIZATION USED (GIVES ABOUT 20 PCT SMALLER CROSS SECTIONS).

PARITY ASYMMETRY.

PHENOMENOLOGICAL SODING MODEL USED.

PHENOMENOLOGICAL SODING MODEL USED.

FROM AN INDEPENDENT MAXIMUM-LIKELIHOOD FIT FOR EACH T INTERVAL.

FOR EVENTS WITH M(P PI+) < 1.32 GEV USING THE METHOD OF MOMENTS AND RHO0 REFLECTION REMOVED.