Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 5-jet bHbH channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 5-jet bHbZ channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 5-jet bZbZ channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 5-jet bHtW channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 5-jet bZtW channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 6-jet bHbH channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 6-jet bHbZ channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 6-jet bZbZ channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 6-jet bHtW channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the hadronic 6-jet bZtW channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the semileptonic 3-jet bHbZ channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the semileptonic 3-jet bZbZ channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the semileptonic 4-jet bHbZ channel.

Distributions of reconstructed VLQ mass for expected postfit background (blue histogram), signal plus background (colored lines), and observed data (black points) for events in the semileptonic 4-jet bZbZ channel.

The limit at 95% CL on the cross section for VLQ pair production for the branching fraction hypothesis 0% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$, 100% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$, and 0% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$

The limit at 95% CL on the cross section for VLQ pair production for the branching fraction hypothesis 25% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$, 25% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$, and 50% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$

The limit at 95% CL on the cross section for VLQ pair production for the branching fraction hypothesis 50% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$, 50% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$, and 0% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$

The limit at 95% CL on the cross section for VLQ pair production for the branching fraction hypothesis 100% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$, 0% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$, and 0% $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$

Median expected exclusion limits on the VLQ mass at 95% CL as a function of the branching fractions $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$ and $\mathcal{B}(B \to tW)$, with $\mathcal{B}(B \to tW) = 1 - \mathcal{B}(B \to bH) - \mathcal{B}(B \to bZ)$. The grey area corresponds to the region where the exclusion limit is less than 1000 GeV.

Median observed exclusion limits on the VLQ mass at 95% CL as a function of the branching fractions $\mathcal{B}(B \to bH)$ and $\mathcal{B}(B \to tW)$, with $\mathcal{B}(B \to tW) = 1 - \mathcal{B}(B \to bH) - \mathcal{B}(B \to bZ)$. The grey area corresponds to the region where the exclusion limit is less than 1000 GeV.

Signal yields for two charge scenarios considered in the analysis, as well as their associated uncertainties.

Distribution of $N_{\text{hits}}^{\text{low dE/dx}}$ in the SR and the CR for the early 2016 data set, as well as for an FCP signal at a mass of 100 GeV and different charge scenarios. The vertical bars and the shaded area correspond to the statistical uncertainty in the SR and the CR, respectively. The p-value of the fit is 6%. The two lower panels show the ratio of the number of tracks observed in the CR (upper) and SR (lower), and the fit function. The vertical bars correspond to the uncertainty from statistical sources, while the shaded area shows the systematic uncertainty in the fit due to the choice of the fitting function and the binomial fit range as explained in low dE/dx the main text. Comparing with respect to the binomial fit starting at $N_{\text{hits}}^{\text{low dE/dx}} = 2$, and not $N_{\text{hits}}^{\text{low dE/dx}} = 1$, is needed to account for the fact that early 2016 data is more strongly affected low dE/dx by instrumental effects that widen the N hits distribution.

Distribution of $N_{\text{hits}}^{\text{low dE/dx}}$ in the SR and the CR for the late 2016 data set, as well as for an FCP signal at a mass of 100 GeV and different charge scenarios. The vertical bars and the shaded area correspond to the statistical uncertainty in the SR and the CR, respectively. The p-value of the fit is 78%. The two lower panels show the ratio of the number of tracks observed in the CR (upper) and SR (lower), and the fit function. The vertical bars correspond to the uncertainty from statistical sources, while the shaded area shows the systematic uncertainty in the fit due to the choice of the fitting function and the binomial fit range as explained in low dE/dx the main text.

Distribution of $N_{\text{hits}}^{\text{low dE/dx}}$ in the SR and the CR for the 2017 data set, as well as for an FCP signal at a mass of 100 GeV and different charge scenarios. The vertical bars and the shaded area correspond to the statistical uncertainty in the SR and the CR, respectively. The p-value of the fit is 65%. The two lower panels show the ratio of the number of tracks observed in the CR (upper) and SR (lower), and the fit function. The vertical bars correspond to the uncertainty from statistical sources, while the shaded area shows the systematic uncertainty in the fit due to the choice of the fitting function and the binomial fit range as explained in low dE/dx the main text.

Distribution of $N_{\text{hits}}^{\text{low dE/dx}}$ in the SR and the CR for the 2018 data set, as well as for an FCP signal at a mass of 100 GeV and different charge scenarios. The vertical bars and the shaded area correspond to the statistical uncertainty in the SR and the CR, respectively. The p-value of the fit is 9%. The two lower panels show the ratio of the number of tracks observed in the CR (upper) and SR (lower), and the fit function. The vertical bars correspond to the uncertainty from statistical sources, while the shaded area shows the systematic uncertainty in the fit due to the choice of the fitting function and the binomial fit range as explained in low dE/dx the main text.

Exclusion region (hatched) at 95% CL in the FCP charge-mass plane for the considered signal. The expected exclusion is shown with the associated 1 and 2 standard deviations $\sigma$ bands. Signal points at charges 0.9, 0.8, 2/3, 0.5, and 1/3 e are connected by straight lines to guide the eye. This is a conservative interpolation. Previous exclusions from CMS [Phys. Rev. D 87 (2013) 092008), JHEP 07 (2013) 122] as well as OPAL [Phys. Lett. B 572 (2003) 8] are given for comparison.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Comparison of data and background pT distribution at the preselection level for the second leading jet.

Comparison of data and background BDT discriminant distributions at the preselection level for LQ mass hypotheses of 1500 GeV.

Comparison of data and background BDT discriminant distributions at the preselection level for LQ mass hypotheses of 1800 GeV.

Comparison of data and background BDT discriminant distributions at the preselection level for LQ mass hypotheses of 2000 GeV.

Total signal selection efficiency, defined as the number of events passing the selection divided by the number of generated events. Enhanced preselection is defined as preselection with the additional requirements m_uu>250 and m_uujj>m_lq. The discrete nature of the final selection for each LQ candidate mass produces the observed variation in the efficiency. Relative uncertainties are less than one percent in all cases.

Event yields in the combined 2016--2018 data at the final selection level.

The expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on the product of the scalar LQ pair production cross section and the branching fractions β^2 as a function of mLQ. The solid lines represent the observed limits, the dashed lines represent the median expected limits, and the inner dark-green and outer light-yellow bands represent the 68% and 95% CL intervals. The σtheory curves and their blue bands represent the theoretical scalar LQ pair production cross sections and the uncertainties on the cross sections due to the PDF prediction and renormalization and factorization scales, respectively.

The expected and observed exclusion limits at 95% CL as a function of the leptoquark mass and the branching fraction β. The solid line represents the observed limits, the dashed line represents the median expected limits, and the inner dark-green and outer light-yellow bands represent the 68% and 95% CL intervals. The area below the observed limit is excluded.

The ratios between the hydrodynamic probes and their Taylor expansions. The ratios are plotted as functions of centrality in PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=5.02~\textrm{Te}\textrm{V}$. The measurement is performed with charged particles within the acceptance region.

The ratios between the hydrodynamic probes and their Taylor expansions. The ratios are plotted as functions of centrality in PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=5.02~\textrm{Te}\textrm{V}$. The measurement is performed with charged particles within the acceptance region.

The magnitudes of the measured skewness $\gamma_1^\textrm{exp}$ and "corrected" skewness $\gamma_{1,\textrm{corr}}^\textrm{exp}$ as functions of centrality in PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=5.02~\textrm{Te}\textrm{V}$. The measurement is performed with charged particles within the acceptance region.

The magnitudes of the measured kurtosis $\gamma_2^\textrm{exp}$ and "corrected" kurtosis $\gamma_{2,\textrm{corr}}^\textrm{exp}$ as functions of centrality in PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=5.02~\textrm{Te}\textrm{V}$. The measurement is performed with charged particles within the acceptance region.

The magnitudes of the measured superskewness $\gamma_3^\textrm{exp}$ and "corrected" superskewness $\gamma_{3,\textrm{corr}}^\textrm{exp}$ as functions of centrality in PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=5.02~\textrm{Te}\textrm{V}$. The measurement is performed with charged particles within the acceptance region.

Efficiency corrected cumulants of net-charge distributions as a function of $\langle N_{part} \rangle$ from Au+Au collisions at different collision energies.

$\langle N_{part} \rangle$ dependence of efficiency corrected $\mu / \sigma^2$ of net-charge distributions for Au+Au collisions at different collision energies.

$\langle N_{part} \rangle$ dependence of efficiency corrected $S \sigma$ of net-charge distributions for Au+Au collisions at different collision energies.

$\langle N_{part} \rangle$ dependence of efficiency corrected $\kappa \sigma^2$ of net-charge distributions for Au+Au collisions at different collision energies.

$\langle N_{part} \rangle$ dependence of efficiency corrected $S \sigma^3 / \mu$ of net-charge distributions for Au+Au collisions at different collision energies.

The energy dependence of efficiency corrected $\mu / \sigma^2$, $S \sigma$, $\kappa \sigma^2$, and $S \sigma^3 / \mu$ of netcharge distributions for central (0%–5%) Au+Au collisions.

The energy dependence of the chemical freeze-out parameter $\mu_B$.

The geometric acceptance multiplied by the efficiency of the $\it{p}_{T}^\text{miss} >$ 200 GeV selection as a function of the proper decay length c$\tau$ for a scalar particle S with a mass of 40 GeV. The acceptance region for DT is defined by requiring the LLP to decay in the region with |z| < 661 cm and 380 cm < r < 736 cm. The acceptance region for CSC is defined by requiring the LLP decay in the region with $|\eta| < 2.4$, r < 695.5 cm, and 661 cm < |z| < 1100 cm or in the region with $|\eta| < 2.4$, r < 270 cm, and 500 cm < |z| < 661 cm. Single CSC cluster requires exactly one LLP to decay in CSC; Single DT cluster requires exactly one LLP to decay in DT; Double cluster requires both LLP to decay in CSC or DT. The denominator in this plot includes all generated events. The nominator includes events that pass the acceptance requirements above and $\it{p}_{T}^\text{miss} >$ 200 GeV.

Distributions of the cluster time for signal, where S decaying to $d\bar{d}$ for a proper decay length c$\tau$ of 1 m and mass of 40 GeV, and for a background-enriched sample in data selected by inverting the $N_\text{hits}$ requirement.

The distributions of $N_\text{hits}$ for single CSC clusters are shown for signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m).

The distributions of $N_\text{hits}$ for single CSC clusters are shown for compared to the OOT background ($t_\text{clusters} < 12.5$ ns). The OOT background is representative of the overall background shape, because the background passing all the selections described above is dominated by pileup and underlying events.

The distributions of $\Delta\phi(\it{p}_{T}^\text{miss} \text{,cluster)}$ for single CSC clusters are shown for signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), compared to the shape of background in a selection in which the cluster is not matched to any RPC hit and passes all other selections. The background is dominated by clusters from noise and low-pT particles.

The distributions of $N_\text{hits}$ for single CSC clusters are shown for signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), compared to the shape of background in a selection in which the cluster is not matched to any RPC hit and passes all other selections. The background is dominated by clusters from noise and low-pT particles.

The distributions of $\Delta\phi(\it{p}_{T}^\text{miss} \text{,cluster)}$ for single CSC clusters are shown for signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), compared to the shape of background in a selection in which the cluster is not matched to any RPC hit and passes all other selections. The background is dominated by clusters from noise and low-pT particles.

The signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), background, and data distributions of $N_\text{clusters}$ passing the $N_\text{hits}$ selection in the search region for CSC-CSC category.

The signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), background, and data distributions of $N_\text{clusters}$ passing the $N_\text{hits}$ selection in the search region for DT-DT category.

The signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), background, and data distributions of $N_\text{clusters}$ passing the $N_\text{hits}$ selection in the search region for DT-CSC category.

The signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), background, and data distributions of $N_\text{hits}$ in the search region of the single-CSC cluster category are shown. The $N_\text{hits}$ distribution includes only events in bins A and D. The right-hand bin in the Nhits distribution includes overflow events.

The signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), background, and data distributions of $\Delta\phi(\it{p}_{T}^\text{miss} \text{,cluster)}$ in the search region of the single-CSC cluster category are shown. The $\Delta\phi(\it{p}_{T}^\text{miss} \text{,cluster)}$ distribution includes only events in bins A and B.

The signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), background, and data distributions of $N_\text{hits}$ in the search region of the single-DT cluster category are shown. The $N_\text{hits}$ distribution includes only events in bins A and D. The right-hand bin in the Nhits distribution includes overflow events.

The signal (assuming B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) = 1%, S $\rightarrow d\bar{d}$, and c$\tau$ = 1 m), background, and data distributions of $\Delta\phi(\it{p}_{T}^\text{miss} \text{,cluster)}$ in the search region of the single-DT cluster category are shown. The $\Delta\phi(\it{p}_{T}^\text{miss} \text{,cluster)}$ distribution includes only events in bins A and B.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 3 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow d\bar{d}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 7 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow d\bar{d}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 15 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow d\bar{d}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 40 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow d\bar{d}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 55 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow d\bar{d}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 0.4 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \pi^{0} \pi^{0}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 1 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \pi^{0} \pi^{0}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 7 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \tau^{+} \tau^{-}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 15 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \tau^{+} \tau^{-}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 40 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \tau^{+} \tau^{-}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 55 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \tau^{+} \tau^{-}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 15 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 40 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 55 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 0.4 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \pi^{+} \pi^{-}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 1 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \pi^{+} \pi^{-}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 1.5 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow K^{+}K^{-}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 1.5 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow K^{0}K^{0}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 0.4 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \gamma\gamma$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) for 0.4 GeV mass and $ S \rightarrow \e^{+} \e^{-}$ decay mode.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow$ SS) as functions of mass and c$\tau$ assuming S inherits all couplings from the Higgs boson evaluated at the LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for vector portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 2 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for vector portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for vector portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for vector portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for vector portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for gluon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 2 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 2 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 2 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for photon portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 4 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 4 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 4 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for higgs portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for darkphoton portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for darkphoton portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for darkphoton portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for darkphoton portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 1)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for darkphoton portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for darkphoton portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for darkphoton portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for darkphoton portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (2.5, 2.5)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for darkphoton portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 5 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for darkphoton portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 10 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for darkphoton portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 15 GeV LLP mass.

The 95% CL observed and expected limits on the branching fraction B(H $\rightarrow \Psi\Psi$) for darkphoton portal, assuming $(\xi_{\omega}$, $\xi_{\Lambda}) = (1, 1)$ and 20 GeV LLP mass.

Away-side jet widths from a Gaussian fit by $h^{\pm}$ partner momentum for various $\pi^0$ trigger momenta in Au+Au collisions.

Away-side $I_{AA}$ for the entire away-side $|\Delta \phi - \pi| < \pi /2$ selection vs. $h^{\pm}$ partner momentum for various $\pi^0$ trigger momenta. A point-to-point uncorrelated 6% normalization uncertainty (mainly due to efficiency corrections) applies to all measurements.

Away-side $I_{AA}$ for the entire away-side $|\Delta \phi - \pi| < \pi /2$ selection vs. $h^{\pm}$ partner momentum for various $\pi^0$ trigger momenta. A point-to-point uncorrelated 6% normalization uncertainty (mainly due to efficiency corrections) applies to all measurements.

Away-side $I_{AA}$ for a narrow “head” $|\Delta \phi - \pi| < \pi /6$ selection vs. $h^{\pm}$ partner momentum for various $\pi^0$ trigger momenta. A point-to-point uncorrelated 6% normalization uncertainty (mainly due to efficiency corrections) applies to all measurements.

Away-side $I_{AA}$ for a narrow “head” $|\Delta \phi - \pi| < \pi /6$ selection vs. $h^{\pm}$ partner momentum for various $\pi^0$ trigger momenta. A point-to-point uncorrelated 6% normalization uncertainty (mainly due to efficiency corrections) applies to all measurements.

Supplemental near-side jet widths from a Gaussian fit by $h^{\pm}$ partner momentum for various $\pi^0$ trigger momenta in $p+p$ collisions.

Supplemental near-side jet widths from a Gaussian fit by $h^{\pm}$ partner momentum for various $\pi^0$ trigger momenta in Au+Au collisions.

Supplemental near-side jet widths from a Gaussian fit by $h^{\pm}$ partner momentum for various $\pi^0$ trigger momenta in Au+Au collisions.

Supplemental away-side $I_{AA}$ for $|\Delta \phi - \pi| < \pi /3$ selection vs. $h^{\pm}$ partner momentum for various $\pi^0$ trigger momenta. A point-to-point uncorrelated 6% normalization uncertainty (mainly due to efficiency corrections) applies to all measurements.

Supplemental away-side $I_{AA}$ for $|\Delta \phi - \pi| < \pi /3$ selection vs. $h^{\pm}$ partner momentum for various $\pi^0$ trigger momenta. A point-to-point uncorrelated 6% normalization uncertainty (mainly due to efficiency corrections) applies to all measurements.

$p+p$ yield vs $p_T^a$ supplemental tables.

Au+Au yield vs $p_T^a$ supplemental tables.

Au+Au yield vs $p_T^a$ supplemental tables.

$z_{g}$ for Matched Trigger jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{g}$ for HardCore Recoil jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{g}$ for HardCore Recoil jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{g}$ for Matched Recoil jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{g}$ for Matched Recoil jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$R_{g}$ for HardCore Trigger jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$R_{g}$ for HardCore Trigger jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$R_{g}$ for Matched Trigger jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$R_{g}$ for Matched Trigger jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$R_{g}$ for HardCore Recoil jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$R_{g}$ for HardCore Recoil jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$R_{g}$ for Matched Recoil jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$R_{g}$ for Matched Recoil jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

Fully corrected two subjet $z_{sj}$ for $15 < p_{\rm{T, jet}} < 20$ GeV/c, R$=$0.4 anti-kT and R$=$0.1 subjets

Fully corrected two subjet $z_{sj}$ for $20 < p_{\rm{T, jet}} < 25$ GeV/c, R$=$0.4 anti-kT and R$=$0.1 subjets

Fully corrected two subjet $z_{sj}$ for $25 < p_{\rm{T, jet}} < 30$ GeV/c, R$=$0.4 anti-kT and R$=$0.1 subjets

Fully corrected two subjet $z_{sj}$ for $30 < p_{\rm{T, jet}} < 40$ GeV/c, R$=$0.4 anti-kT and R$=$0.1 subjets

Fully corrected two subjet $\theta_{sj}$ for $15 < p_{\rm{T, jet}} < 20$ GeV/c, R$=$0.4 anti-kT and R$=$0.1 subjets

Fully corrected two subjet $\theta_{sj}$ for $20 < p_{\rm{T, jet}} < 25$ GeV/c, R$=$0.4 anti-kT and R$=$0.1 subjets

Fully corrected two subjet $\theta_{sj}$ for $25 < p_{\rm{T, jet}} < 30$ GeV/c, R$=$0.4 anti-kT and R$=$0.1 subjets

Fully corrected two subjet $\theta_{sj}$ for $30 < p_{\rm{T, jet}} < 40$ GeV/c, R$=$0.4 anti-kT and R$=$0.1 subjets

$z_{sj}$ for HardCore Trigger jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{sj}$ for HardCore Trigger jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{sj}$ for Matched Trigger jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{sj}$ for Matched Trigger jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{sj}$ for HardCore Recoil jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{sj}$ for HardCore Recoil jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{sj}$ for Matched Recoil jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{sj}$ for Matched Recoil jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$\theta_{sj}$ for HardCore Trigger jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$\theta_{sj}$ for HardCore Trigger jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$\theta_{sj}$ for Matched Trigger jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$\theta_{sj}$ for Matched Trigger jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$\theta_{sj}$ for HardCore Recoil jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$\theta_{sj}$ for HardCore Recoil jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$\theta_{sj}$ for Matched Recoil jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$\theta_{sj}$ for Matched Recoil jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$A_{J}$ for HardCore R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $\theta_{sj} > 0.1$ in Au$+$Au collisions

$A_{J}$ for HardCore R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $\theta_{sj} > 0.1$ in pp$+$AuAu reference

$A_{J}$ for HardCore R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $0.1 < \theta_{sj} < 0.2$ in Au$+$Au collisions

$A_{J}$ for HardCore R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $0.1 < \theta_{sj} < 0.2$ in pp$+$AuAu reference

$A_{J}$ for HardCore R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $0.2 < \theta_{sj} < 0.3$ in Au$+$Au collisions

$A_{J}$ for HardCore R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $0.2 < \theta_{sj} < 0.3$ in pp$+$AuAu reference

$A_{J}$ for Matched R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $\theta_{sj} > 0.1$ in Au$+$Au collisions

$A_{J}$ for Matched R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $\theta_{sj} > 0.1$ in pp$+$AuAu reference

$A_{J}$ for Matched R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $0.1 < \theta_{sj} < 0.2$ in Au$+$Au collisions

$A_{J}$ for Matched R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $0.1 < \theta_{sj} < 0.2$ in pp$+$AuAu reference

$A_{J}$ for Matched R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $0.2 < \theta_{sj} < 0.3$ in Au$+$Au collisions

$A_{J}$ for Matched R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $0.2 < \theta_{sj} < 0.3$ in pp$+$AuAu reference

tracking efficiency in pp collisions as a function of track momentum

tracking efficiency in AuAu collisions as a function of track momentum

Dependence of the parameter $A$ on $(t_1, t_2)$.

Dependence of the parameter $R$ on $(t_1, t_2)$.

Dependence of the parameter $c$ on $(t_1, t_2)$.

Dependence of the parameter $R$ on the two scattered proton transverse momenta.

Correlation coefficients among values of best parameters for the two-channel model, in the case of the exponential parametrisation of the proton-pomeron form factor.

Correlation coefficients among values of best parameters for the two-channel model, in the case of the Orear-type parametrisation of the proton-pomeron form factor.

Correlation coefficients among values of best parameters for the two-channel model, in the case of the power-law parametrisation of the proton-pomeron form factor.

The JEC, JER, and total systematic uncertainties in unfolded cross sections as functions of transverse momentum, for 1.5<|y|<2. The total systematic uncertainty includes also the luminosity, jet identification and trigger efficiency uncertainties.

The unfolded measured particle-level inclusive jet cross section as functions of jet pT (markers), for |y|<0.5, compared to the NLO perturbative QCD prediction (histogram), using the CT14NLO PDF set, with muR = muF = HT, and corrected for the NP effects. The experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are shown.

The unfolded measured particle-level inclusive jet cross section as functions of jet pT (markers), for 0.5<|y|<1, compared to the NLO perturbative QCD prediction (histogram), using the CT14NLO PDF set, with muR = muF = HT, and corrected for the NP effects. The experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are shown.

The unfolded measured particle-level inclusive jet cross section as functions of jet pT (markers), for 1<|y|<1.5, compared to the NLO perturbative QCD prediction (histogram), using the CT14NLO PDF set, with muR = muF = HT, and corrected for the NP effects. The experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are shown.

The unfolded measured particle-level inclusive jet cross section as functions of jet pT (markers), for 1.5<|y|<2, compared to the NLO perturbative QCD prediction (histogram), using the CT14NLO PDF set, with muR = muF = HT, and corrected for the NP effects. The experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NLO PDF set, with mu = pT, for |y|<0.5. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NLO PDF set, with mu = pT, for 0.5<|y|<1. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NLO PDF set, with mu = pT, for 1<|y|<1.5. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NLO PDF set, with mu = pT, for 1.5<|y|<2. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for |y|<0.5. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 0.5<|y|<1. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 1<|y|<1.5. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 1.5<|y|<2. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NNLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NNLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for |y|<0.5. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NNLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NNLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 0.5<|y|<1. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NNLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NNLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 1<|y|<1.5. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NNLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NNLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 1.5<|y|<2. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NNLO theoretical predictions, using the NNPDF31NNLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for |y|<0.5. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NNLO theoretical predictions, using the NNPDF31NNLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 0.5<|y|<1. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NNLO theoretical predictions, using the NNPDF31NNLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 1<|y|<1.5. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NNLO theoretical predictions, using the NNPDF31NNLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 1.5<|y|<2. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

The effect of aS(MZ) variation, for |y|<0.5. The NNLO theoretical cross section predictions using the NNPDF31NNLO PDF with m = HT, calculated for different choices of aS (0.108, 0.110, 0.112, 0.114, 0.116, 0.117, 0.118, 0.119, 0.120, 0.122, and 0.124), are divided by the benchmark NNLO prediction for aS = 0.118 and the same choice of PDF set, muR, and muF. Also shown is the experimental unfolded measurement divided by the same benchmark prediction. The width of the unity line corresponds to the statistical uncertainty from the MC integration for the determination of the NNLO prediction. The error bars on the unfolded data correspond to the total experimental statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature.

The effect of aS(MZ) variation, for 0.5<|y|<1. The NNLO theoretical cross section predictions using the NNPDF31NNLO PDF with m = HT, calculated for different choices of aS (0.108, 0.110, 0.112, 0.114, 0.116, 0.117, 0.118, 0.119, 0.120, 0.122, and 0.124), are divided by the benchmark NNLO prediction for aS = 0.118 and the same choice of PDF set, muR, and muF. Also shown is the experimental unfolded measurement divided by the same benchmark prediction. The width of the unity line corresponds to the statistical uncertainty from the MC integration for the determination of the NNLO prediction. The error bars on the unfolded data correspond to the total experimental statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature.

The effect of aS(MZ) variation, for 1<|y|<1.5. The NNLO theoretical cross section predictions using the NNPDF31NNLO PDF with m = HT, calculated for different choices of aS (0.108, 0.110, 0.112, 0.114, 0.116, 0.117, 0.118, 0.119, 0.120, 0.122, and 0.124), are divided by the benchmark NNLO prediction for aS = 0.118 and the same choice of PDF set, muR, and muF. Also shown is the experimental unfolded measurement divided by the same benchmark prediction. The width of the unity line corresponds to the statistical uncertainty from the MC integration for the determination of the NNLO prediction. The error bars on the unfolded data correspond to the total experimental statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature.

The effect of aS(MZ) variation, for 1.5<|y|<2. The NNLO theoretical cross section predictions using the NNPDF31NNLO PDF with m = HT, calculated for different choices of aS (0.108, 0.110, 0.112, 0.114, 0.116, 0.117, 0.118, 0.119, 0.120, 0.122, and 0.124), are divided by the benchmark NNLO prediction for aS = 0.118 and the same choice of PDF set, muR, and muF. Also shown is the experimental unfolded measurement divided by the same benchmark prediction. The width of the unity line corresponds to the statistical uncertainty from the MC integration for the determination of the NNLO prediction. The error bars on the unfolded data correspond to the total experimental statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature.

Unfolded correlation matrix for |y|<0.5.

Unfolded correlation matrix for 0.5<|y|<1.

Unfolded correlation matrix for 1<|y|<1.5.

Unfolded correlation matrix for 1.5<|y|<2.

absolutely normalized dijet yields scaled by 1/<TAA> in 20-40% central PbPb collisions

absolutely normalized dijet yields scaled by 1/<TAA> in 40-60% central PbPb collisions

absolutely normalized dijet yields scaled by 1/<TAA> in 60-80% central PbPb collisions

self normalized dijets from pp collisions

self normalized dijet distributions in 0-10% central PbPb collisions

self normalized dijet distributions in 10-20% central PbPb collisions

self normalized dijet distributions in 20-40% central PbPb collisions

self normalized dijet distributions in 40-60% central PbPb collisions

self normalized dijet distributions in 60-80% central PbPb collisions

leading jet RAA^pair in 0-10% central PbPb collisions

subleading jet RAA^pair in 0-10% central PbPb collisions

leading jet RAA^pair in 10-20% central PbPb collisions

subleading jet RAA^pair in 10-20% central PbPb collisions

leading jet RAA^pair in 20-40% central PbPb collisions

subleading jet RAA^pair in 20-40% central PbPb collisions

leading jet RAA^pair in 40-60% central PbPb collisions

subleading jet RAA^pair in 40-60% central PbPb collisions

leading jet RAA^pair in 60-80% central PbPb collisions

subleading jet RAA^pair in 60-80% central PbPb collisions

ratio of subleading jet RAA^pair to leading jet RAA^pair in PbPb collisions

Correlation matrix for the differential branching fraction extraction between different $q^2$ bins in the simultaneous fit.

The product of acceptance and efficiency ($A\epsilon$) of the $\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{B}^+\to\mathrm{K}^+\mu^+\mu^-)$ channel, as a function of the muon pair $q^2$, as measured in simulated signal events, after all the corrections applied. In the figure, regions corresponding to resonances are displayed with red markers.

Same as Table 5, but for the bins containing the J$\psi$ and $\psi$(2S) resonances.

Integrated branching fraction $\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{B}^\pm \to \mathrm{K}^\pm\mu^+\mu^-)$ in the low-$q^2$ region.

Ratio of branching fractions $\mathcal{B}(\text{B}^\pm \to \text{K}^\pm\mu^+\mu^-)$ to $\mathcal{B}(\text{B}^\pm \to \text{K}^\pm\text{e}^+\text{e}^-)$, determined from the measured double ratio $R$(K) of these decays to the respective branching fractions of the decay chains $\text{B}^\pm\to\text{J/}\psi\text{K}^\pm$ with $\text{J/}\psi\to\mu^+\mu^-$ and $\text{e}^+\text{e}^-$.

Negative log likelihood function from the fit profiled as a function of the inverse ratio $R(\mathrm{K})^{-1}$.

\Delta v_1 between proton and anti-proton vs rapidity in Au+Au 200 GeV 50-80% centrality.

\Delta v_1 between proton and anti-proton vs rapidity in Zr+Zr and Ru+Ru (combined) 200 GeV 50-80% centrality.

\Delta v_1 between proton and anti-proton vs rapidity in Au+Au 27 GeV 50-80% centrality.

\Delta dv1/dy as a function of centrality in Au+Au 200 GeV.

\Delta dv1/dy as a function of centrality in Ru+Ru and Zr+Zr 200 GeV

\Delta dv1/dy as a function of centrality in Au+Au 27 GeV.

Total efficiencies for the selection of signal events after categorization and application of the tighter photon $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ selection used to optimize the signal significance spin-1 $q\bar{q'}\to X^{\pm} \to W^{\pm}\gamma$. In addition to the total efficiency, contributions to the signal selection from each of the separate event categories are shown. The efficiencies calculated from MC samples with $W/Z$ hadronic decays are shown as the points on each curve. The line presents interpolated results.

Total efficiencies for the selection of signal events after categorization and application of the tighter photon $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ selection used to optimize the signal significance spin-2 $q\bar{q}\to X^0 \to Z\gamma$. In addition to the total efficiency, contributions to the signal selection from each of the separate event categories are shown. The efficiencies calculated from MC samples with $W/Z$ hadronic decays are shown as the points on each curve. The line presents interpolated results.

Total efficiencies for the selection of signal events after categorization and application of the tighter photon $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\gamma}$ selection used to optimize the signal significance spin-2 $gg\to X^0 \to Z\gamma$. In addition to the total efficiency, contributions to the signal selection from each of the separate event categories are shown. The efficiencies calculated from MC samples with $W/Z$ hadronic decays are shown as the points on each curve. The line presents interpolated results.

The $m_{J\gamma}$ distributions of data events selected for the spin-1 $q\bar{q'}\to X^{\pm} \to W^{\pm}\gamma$ search in the D2 category. The background-only fit function shape is shown as the solid curve overlaid with a shaded band corresponding to statistical uncertainties in background parameters. Various signal shapes with cross-sections corresponding to expected limits obtained in this analysis are shown as dashed lines.

The $m_{J\gamma}$ distributions of data events selected for the spin-1 $q\bar{q'}\to X^{\pm} \to W^{\pm}\gamma$ search in the WMASS category. The background-only fit function shape is shown as the solid curve overlaid with a shaded band corresponding to statistical uncertainties in background parameters. Various signal shapes with cross-sections corresponding to expected limits obtained in this analysis are shown as dashed lines.

The $m_{J\gamma}$ distributions of data events selected for the spin-0 $gg \to X^{0} \to Z\gamma$ search in the BTAG category. The background-only fit function shape is shown as the solid curve overlaid with a shaded band corresponding to statistical uncertainties in background parameters. Various signal shapes with cross-sections corresponding to expected limits obtained in this analysis are shown as dashed lines.

The $m_{J\gamma}$ distributions of data events selected for the spin-0 $gg \to X^{0} \to Z\gamma$ search in the D2 category. The background-only fit function shape is shown as the solid curve overlaid with a shaded band corresponding to statistical uncertainties in background parameters. Various signal shapes with cross-sections corresponding to expected limits obtained in this analysis are shown as dashed lines.

The $m_{J\gamma}$ distributions of data events selected for the spin-0 $gg \to X^{0} \to Z\gamma$ search in the ZMASS category. The background-only fit function shape is shown as the solid curve overlaid with a shaded band corresponding to statistical uncertainties in background parameters. Various signal shapes with cross-sections corresponding to expected limits obtained in this analysis are shown as dashed lines.

The $m_{J\gamma}$ distributions of data events selected for the spin-2 $gg \to X^{0} \to Z\gamma$ search in the BTAG category. The background-only fit function shape is shown as the solid curve overlaid with a shaded band corresponding to statistical uncertainties in background parameters. Various signal shapes with cross-sections corresponding to expected limits obtained in this analysis are shown as dashed lines.

The $m_{J\gamma}$ distributions of data events selected for the spin-2 $gg \to X^{0} \to Z\gamma$ search in the D2 category. The background-only fit function shape is shown as the solid curve overlaid with a shaded band corresponding to statistical uncertainties in background parameters. Various signal shapes with cross-sections corresponding to expected limits obtained in this analysis are shown as dashed lines.

The $m_{J\gamma}$ distributions of data events selected for the spin-2 $gg \to X^{0} \to Z\gamma$ search in the ZMASS category. The background-only fit function shape is shown as the solid curve overlaid with a shaded band corresponding to statistical uncertainties in background parameters. Various signal shapes with cross-sections corresponding to expected limits obtained in this analysis are shown as dashed lines.

The $m_{J\gamma}$ distributions of data events selected for the spin-2 $q\bar{q} \to X^{0} \to Z\gamma$ search in the BTAG category. The background-only fit function shape is shown as the solid curve overlaid with a shaded band corresponding to statistical uncertainties in background parameters. Various signal shapes with cross-sections corresponding to expected limits obtained in this analysis are shown as dashed lines.

The $m_{J\gamma}$ distributions of data events selected for the spin-2 $q\bar{q} \to X^{0} \to Z\gamma$ search in the D2 category. The background-only fit function shape is shown as the solid curve overlaid with a shaded band corresponding to statistical uncertainties in background parameters. Various signal shapes with cross-sections corresponding to expected limits obtained in this analysis are shown as dashed lines.

The $m_{J\gamma}$ distributions of data events selected for the spin-2 $q\bar{q} \to X^{0} \to Z\gamma$ search in the ZMASS category. The background-only fit function shape is shown as the solid curve overlaid with a shaded band corresponding to statistical uncertainties in background parameters. Various signal shapes with cross-sections corresponding to expected limits obtained in this analysis are shown as dashed lines.

The 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma(pp\to X)\times B(X\to W/Z\gamma)$ as a function of $m_{X}$ for spin-0 $gg \to X^{0} \to Z\gamma$. The observed limits are shown as a solid black line and the expected ones are shown as a dashed line with the 1$\sigma$ (2$\sigma$) uncertainty band presented as the green (yellow) band.

The 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma(pp\to X)\times B(X\to W/Z\gamma)$ as a function of $m_{X}$ for spin-2 $gg \to X^{0} \to Z\gamma$. The observed limits are shown as a solid black line and the expected ones are shown as a dashed line with the 1$\sigma$ (2$\sigma$) uncertainty band presented as the green (yellow) band.

The 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma(pp\to X)\times B(X\to W/Z\gamma)$ as a function of $m_{X}$ for spin-2 $q\bar{q} \to X^{0} \to Z\gamma$. The observed limits are shown as a solid black line and the expected ones are shown as a dashed line with the 1$\sigma$ (2$\sigma$) uncertainty band presented as the green (yellow) band.

The 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma(pp\to X)\times B(X\to W/Z\gamma)$ as a function of $m_{X}$ for spin-1 $q\bar{q'}\to X^{\pm} \to W^{\pm}\gamma$. The observed limits are shown as a solid black line and the expected ones are shown as a dashed line with the 1$\sigma$ (2$\sigma$) uncertainty band presented as the green (yellow) band.

The jet mass distribution of large-$R$ jets originating from the hadronic decay of $W$ and $Z$ bosons produced from the decay of BSM bosons with mass $m_X = 2000$ GeV. The decays simulated are for the production models $q\bar{q'}\to X^{\pm} \to W^{\pm}\gamma$ with a spin-1 resonance $X^{\pm}$ and $gg\to X^0 \to Z\gamma$ with a spin-0 resonance $X^{0}$.

The photon $E_{T}$ selection criteria as a function of resonance mass for D2 categories. Selections for four different signal channels are shown together.

The photon $E_{T}$ selection criteria as a function of resonance mass for ZMASS or WMASS categories. Selections for four different signal channels are shown together.

Correlation matrix of the unfolding uncertainty between the inclusive-jet measurement and the previous dijet measurement. Correlations are given in percent.

Summary of different determinations of $\alpha_s(M_Z^2)$ at NNLO or higher order, adapted from PDG, see references therein. The red points are included in the PDG world average. The averages from each sub-field are shown as yellow bands and the world average as a blue band. A recent measurement from CMS using jet cross sections and the latest determination from HERAPDF, which are not yet included in the world average, are shown in green. The current determination, assuming half-correlated and half-uncorrelated scale uncertainties, is shown in black.

Value of the strong coupling $\alpha_s(\mu^2)$ as a function of the scale $\mu$. The data points indicate determinations from measurements that were performed close to the indicated scale. The uncertainties represent the full uncertainty of each determination. All depicted results were obtained at least at NNLO. They are based on data from $e^+e^-$, $ep$ and $pp$ collisions, as well as from $\tau$ lepton decays and quarkonium states. The solid blue line shows the PDG world average. Also shown are the $\alpha_s(M_Z^2)$ values corresponding to each data point.

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 9

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 12

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 7

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 13

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 3

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 5

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 11

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 14

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 4

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 10

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 1

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 6

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 15

Isovector WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 3

Isovector WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 10

Isovector WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 13

Isovector WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 12

Isovector WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 8

Isovector WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 1

Isovector WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 4

Isovector WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 5

Isovector WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 7

Isovector WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 11

Isovector WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 15

Isovector WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 9

Isovector WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 14

Isovector WIMP-nucleon elastic coupling limit for Operator 6

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 12

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 3

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 9

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 7

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 10

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 15

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 8

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 4

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 5

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 6

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 13

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 11

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 14

Isoscalar WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 1

Isovector WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 13

Isovector WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 1

Isovector WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 4

Isovector WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 7

Isovector WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 9

Isovector WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 3

Isovector WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 11

Isovector WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 5

Isovector WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 10

Isovector WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 8

Isovector WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 14

Isovector WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 15

Isovector WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 6

Isovector WIMP-nucleon inelastic coupling limit for Operator 12

Statistical correlation coefficients for double-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the dijet invariant mass ($m_{1,2}$) and the absolute rapidity of the outermost jet ($\left| y \right|_\text{max}$)

Double-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.8 as a function of the dijet invariant mass ($m_{1,2}$) and the absolute rapidity of the outermost jet ($\left| y \right|_\text{max}$)

Electroweak corrections to double-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.8 as a function of the dijet invariant mass ($m_{1,2}$) and the absolute rapidity of the outermost jet ($\left| y \right|_\text{max}$)

Nonperturbative corrections to double-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.8 as a function of the dijet invariant mass ($m_{1,2}$) and the absolute rapidity of the outermost jet ($\left| y \right|_\text{max}$)

Statistical correlation coefficients for double-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.8 as a function of the dijet invariant mass ($m_{1,2}$) and the absolute rapidity of the outermost jet ($\left| y \right|_\text{max}$)

Triple-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the dijet invariant mass ($m_{1,2}$), the total boost of dijet system ($y_\text{b}$), and the absolute rapidity separation of the two jets ($y^*$)

Electroweak corrections to triple-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the dijet invariant mass ($m_{1,2}$), the total boost of dijet system ($y_\text{b}$), and the absolute rapidity separation of the two jets ($y^*$)

Nonperturbative corrections to triple-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the dijet invariant mass ($m_{1,2}$), the total boost of dijet system ($y_\text{b}$), and the absolute rapidity separation of the two jets ($y^*$)

Statistical correlation coefficients for triple-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the dijet invariant mass ($m_{1,2}$), the total boost of dijet system ($y_\text{b}$), and the absolute rapidity separation of the two jets ($y^*$)

Triple-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.8 as a function of the dijet invariant mass ($m_{1,2}$), the total boost of dijet system ($y_\text{b}$), and the absolute rapidity separation of the two jets ($y^*$)

Electroweak corrections to triple-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.8 as a function of the dijet invariant mass ($m_{1,2}$), the total boost of dijet system ($y_\text{b}$), and the absolute rapidity separation of the two jets ($y^*$)

Nonperturbative corrections to triple-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.8 as a function of the dijet invariant mass ($m_{1,2}$), the total boost of dijet system ($y_\text{b}$), and the absolute rapidity separation of the two jets ($y^*$)

Statistical correlation coefficients for triple-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.8 as a function of the dijet invariant mass ($m_{1,2}$), the total boost of dijet system ($y_\text{b}$), and the absolute rapidity separation of the two jets ($y^*$)

Triple-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the dijet average transverse momentum ($\langle p_\text{T} \rangle_{1,2}$), the total boost of dijet system ($y_\text{b}$), and the absolute rapidity separation of the two jets ($y^*$)

Electroweak corrections to triple-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the dijet average transverse momentum ($\langle p_\text{T} \rangle_{1,2}$), the total boost of dijet system ($y_\text{b}$), and the absolute rapidity separation of the two jets ($y^*$)

Nonperturbative corrections to triple-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the dijet average transverse momentum ($\langle p_\text{T} \rangle_{1,2}$), the total boost of dijet system ($y_\text{b}$), and the absolute rapidity separation of the two jets ($y^*$)

Statistical correlation coefficients for triple-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the dijet average transverse momentum ($\langle p_\text{T} \rangle_{1,2}$), the total boost of dijet system ($y_\text{b}$), and the absolute rapidity separation of the two jets ($y^*$)

Triple-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.8 as a function of the dijet average transverse momentum ($\langle p_\text{T} \rangle_{1,2}$), the total boost of dijet system ($y_\text{b}$), and the absolute rapidity separation of the two jets ($y^*$)

Electroweak corrections to triple-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.8 as a function of the dijet average transverse momentum ($\langle p_\text{T} \rangle_{1,2}$), the total boost of dijet system ($y_\text{b}$), and the absolute rapidity separation of the two jets ($y^*$)

Nonperturbative corrections to triple-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.8 as a function of the dijet average transverse momentum ($\langle p_\text{T} \rangle_{1,2}$), the total boost of dijet system ($y_\text{b}$), and the absolute rapidity separation of the two jets ($y^*$)

Statistical correlation coefficients for triple-differential dijet cross section for anti-$k_\text{T}$ jets with R = 0.8 as a function of the dijet average transverse momentum ($\langle p_\text{T} \rangle_{1,2}$), the total boost of dijet system ($y_\text{b}$), and the absolute rapidity separation of the two jets ($y^*$)

Forward-rapidity $J/\psi$ —> $\mu^+\mu^-$ $d$+Au Nuclear Dependence at $\sqrt{s}$ = 200 GeV. (sys. A, B systematics are relative, i.e. they multiply the $R_{dAu}$ value. The sysA uncertainty includes statistical uncertainties as well as point-to-point uncorrelated systematics, sys. B represents uncertainties that are correlated from point to point, and sys. C represents uncertainties in the overall normalization.)

Mid rapidity $d$+Au —> $e^+e^-$ $J/\psi$ $R_{dAu}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=200 GeV. (Sys. A, B systematics are absolute, i.e. they add/subtract directly from $R_{dAu}$. The sys. A uncertainty includes statistical uncertainties as well as point-to-point uncorrelated systematics, sys. B represents uncertainties that are correlated from point to point, and sys. C represents uncertainties in the overall normalization.)

$d$+Au vs centrality vs $y$. (All uncertainties are absolute. The sys. A uncertainty includes both the statistical uncertainty and the point-to-point uncorrelated systematic, sys. B represents uncertainties that are correlated from point to point, and sys. C represents uncertainties in the overall normalization.)

Forward-rapidity $J/\psi$ —> $\mu^+\mu^-$ $d$+Au Nuclear Dependence at $\sqrt{s}$ = 200 GeV. (sys. A, B systematics are relative, i.e. they multiply the $R_{dAu}$ value. The sysA uncertainty includes statistical uncertainties as well as point-to-point uncorrelated systematics, sys. B represents uncertainties that are correlated from point to point, and sys. C represents uncertainties in the overall normalization.)

Mid rapidity $d$+Au —> $e^+e^-$ $J/\psi$ $R_{dAu}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=200 GeV. (Sys. A, B systematics are absolute, i.e. they add/subtract directly from $R_{dAu}$. The sys. A uncertainty includes statistical uncertainties as well as point-to-point uncorrelated systematics, sys. B represents uncertainties that are correlated from point to point, and sys. C represents uncertainties in the overall normalization.)

Forward-rapidity $J/\psi$ —> $\mu^+\mu^-$ $d$+Au Nuclear Dependence at $\sqrt{s}$ = 200 GeV. (sys. A, B systematics are relative, i.e. they multiply the $R_{CP}$ value. The sys. A uncertainty includes statistical uncertainties as well as point-to-point uncorrelated systematics, sys. B represents uncertainties that are correlated from point to point, and sys. C represents uncertainties in the overall normalization.)

Mid rapidity $d$+Au —> $e^+e^-$ $J/\psi$ $R_{CP}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=200 GeV. (Sys. A, B systematics are absolute, i.e. they add/subtract directly from $R_{CP}$. The sys. A uncertainty includes statistical uncertainties as well as point-to-point uncorrelated systematics, sys. B represents uncertainties that are correlated from point to point, and sys. C represents uncertainties in the overall normalization.)

The distribution of $\mathrm{p_{T}^{miss}}$ (GeV) in 2L1T MisID CR events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction.

The distribution of $\mathrm{M_{T}}$ (GeV) in 3L OnZ CR events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction.

The distribution of $\mathrm{H_{T}}$ (GeV) in 3L ttZ CR events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction.

Distribution of BDT score from the SS-M ($\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$) BDT for the 3L+2L1T CR events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The 3L+2L1T CR consists of the 3L OnZ, 3L Z$\mathrm{\gamma}$, and 2L1T MisID CRs. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction.

The distribution of visible diboson $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ (GeV) in 4L ZZ CR events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction.

Distribution of BDT score from the SS-M ($\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$) BDT for the 4L ZZ CR events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction.

The distribution of $\mathrm{L_{T}}$ in all seven multilepton channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton of $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 1 TeV in the doublet scenario, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The distribution of $\mathrm{p_{T}^{miss}}$ in all seven multilepton channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermion of $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV in the flavor-democratic scenario, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The distribution of $\mathrm{H_{T}}$ in all seven multilepton channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark of $mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1 TeV coupled to a top quark and a $\tau$ lepton, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The distribution of $\mathrm{M_{OSSF}}$ in channels with at least one light lepton pair (4L, 3L1T, 3L, 2L2T, and 2L1T) for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermion of $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV in the flavor-democratic scenario, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The $\mathrm{N_{b}}$ distribution in 4L, 3L1T, 3L, 2L2T, 2L1T, 1L3T, and 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction.

The invariant mass distribution of the opposite-sign same-flavor ($\mathrm{M_{OSSF}}$) tau lepton pair distribution in 2L2T, 1L3T, and 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction.

The $\mathrm{M_{T}^{12}}$ distribution in 4L, 3L1T, 3L, 2L2T, 2L1T, 1L3T, and 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction.

The $\mathrm{N_{b}}$ distribution in 3L, 2L1T, and 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.

The $\mathrm{L_{T}}$ distribution in 3L, 2L1T, and 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.

The $\mathrm{p_{T}^{miss}}$ distribution in 3L, 2L1T, and 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.

The $\mathrm{H_{T}}$ distribution in 3L, 2L1T, and 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.

The $\mathrm{M_{OSSF}}$ distribution in 3L, and 2L1T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.

The invariant mass distribution of the opposite-sign different-flavor ($\mathrm{M_{OSDF}}$) light lepton pair distribution in 3L, and 2L1T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.

The invariant mass distribution of the opposite-sign same-flavor ($\mathrm{M_{OSSF}}$) tau lepton pair distribution in 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.

The invariant mass distribution of the opposite-sign different-flavor ($\mathrm{M_{OSDF}}$) light lepton and tau lepton pair distribution in 2L1T, and 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.

The $\mathrm{M_{T}^{1}}$ distribution in 3L, 2L1T, and 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.

The $\mathrm{M_{T}^{12}}$ distribution in 3L, 2L1T, and 1L2T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.

The model independent fundamental table categories for the combined 2016-2018 data set, as defined in Table 1. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.

The $\mathrm{N_{b}}$ distribution in 4L, 3L1T, 2L2T, and 1L3T events for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The rightmost bin contains the overflow events. The gray band represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties on the SM background predictions.

The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table in 3L channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table in 2L1T and 1L2T channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table in 3L channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table in 2L1T and 1L2T channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table in 4L, 3L1T, 2L2T, and 1L3T channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table in 4L, 3L1T, 2L2T, and 1L3T channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 2L1T and 1L2T channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 2L1T and 1L2T channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 4L, 3L1T, 2L2T, and 1L3T channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 4L, 3L1T, 2L2T, and 1L3T channels for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L 0B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L 1B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L 2B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 2L1T 0B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 2L1T 1B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 2L1T 2B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 1L2T channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. An example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid. For this category, the signal yield is negligible and is not visible in the figure.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L 0B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L 1B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L 2B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 2L1T 0B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 2L1T 1B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 2L1T 2B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 1L2T channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. An example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid. For this category, the signal yield is negligible and is not visible in the figure.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 4L 0B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 4L 1B/2B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L1T, 2L2T, and 1L3T channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 4L 0B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 4L 1B/2B channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table in 3L1T, 2L2T, and 1L3T channel for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-L BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-L BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-L BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-M BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-M BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-M BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-H BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 900 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-H BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 900 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-H BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 900 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-L BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-L BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-L BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-M BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-M BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-M BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-H BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 900 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-H BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 900 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The VLL-H BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 900 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 850 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 850 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 850 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 100 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 300 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 550 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 850 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 850 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SS-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the scenario with mixing exclusively to $\tau$ lepton for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 850 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 3-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and an electron for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-VL $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 200 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-L $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 400 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-M $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 700 GeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2016 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2017 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The LQ-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT regions for the 4-lepton channels for the 2018 data set. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background prediction. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown after fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a $\tau lepton$ for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.2 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95%% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario using the table schemes and the BDT regions of the SS-M and the SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ BDTs. To the left of the vertical dashed gray line, the limits are shown from the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table, and to the right the limits are shown from the BDT regions.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95%% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\mathrm{\tau}$ leptons: doublet model. To the left of the vertical dashed gray line, the limits are shown from the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table, and to the right the limits are shown from the BDT regions.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks: $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ and $\mathrm{\beta=1}$. To the left of the vertical dashed gray line, the limits are shown from the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table, and to the right the limits are shown from the BDT regions.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks: $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ and $\mathrm{\beta=1}$. To the left of the vertical dashed gray line, the limits are shown from the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table, and to the right the limits are shown from the BDT regions.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks: $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ and $\mathrm{\beta=1}$. To the left of the vertical dashed gray line, the limits are shown from the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table, and to the right the limits are shown from the BDT regions.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\mathrm{\tau}$ leptons: singlet model. The limit is shown from the advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table for all masses.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ scenario using the BDT regions.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau}}$ scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario using the BDT regions.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario using the BDT regions.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario using the BDT regions.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario using the BDT regions.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario using the BDT regions.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario using the BDT regions.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\tau$ leptons in the doublet scenario using the BDT regions.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\tau$ leptons in the doublet scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\tau$ leptons in the doublet scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\tau$ leptons in the doublet scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\tau$ leptons in the singlet scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\tau$ leptons in the singlet scenario using the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95% CL on the production cross section for the vector-like $\tau$ leptons in the singlet scenario using the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table.

Observed lower limits at 95% CL on the mass of the type-III seesaw fermions in the plane defined by $\mathrm{B_{e}}$ and $\mathrm{B_{\tau}}$, with the constraint that $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}+B_{\tau}=1}$. These limits arise from the SS-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT when $\mathrm{B_{\tau}\geq0.9}$, and by the SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}+B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT for the other decay branching fraction combinations.

Median Expected lower limits at 95% CL on the mass of the type-III seesaw fermions in the plane defined by $\mathrm{B_{e}}$ and $\mathrm{B_{\tau}}$, with the constraint that $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}+B_{\tau}=1}$. These limits arise from the SS-H $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT when $\mathrm{B_{\tau}\geq0.9}$, and by the SS-H $\mathrm{B_{e}+B_{\mu}+B_{\tau}=1}$ BDT for the other decay branching fraction combinations.

Acceptance times efficiency values for the major SM backgrounds WZ, ZZ, and ttZ in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample. The statistical uncertainty on the acceptance times efficiency values is insignificant with respect to the quoted precision.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the vector-like $\mathrm{\tau}$ lepton model in the doublet scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the vector-like $\mathrm{\tau}$ lepton model in the singlet scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{(B_{e}=B_{\mu}=B_{\tau})}$ scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{(B_{e}=1)}$ scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{(B_{\mu}=1)}$ scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the type-III seesaw fermions in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1)}$ scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\tau}=1}$ scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{e}=1}$ scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.

Acceptance times efficiency values with statistical uncertainty for the scalar leptoquarks with $\mathrm{\beta=1}$ in the $\mathrm{B_{\mu}=1}$ scenario in the signal regions of all seven multilepton channels. The product is defined as the ratio of the total reconstructed yield in a given channel (after all the corrections and scale factor implementation) to the product of luminosity and the production cross section of the given simulation sample.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for electrons in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for 0.2<dRmin<0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for dRmin>0.4. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for muons in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.2}$ region, arising from the decay of $\tau$ leptons for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.2. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.2. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.2. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 1-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.2. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|<1.1}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.2. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{|\eta|>1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for dRmin>0.2. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}<2}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency and associated uncertainty maps for 3-prong $\tau_{h}$ in the $\mathrm{1.1<|\eta|<1.6}$ region, arising from the decay of SM gauge bosons (W/Z/h) for $\mathrm{N_{j}>1}$. The lepton efficiency is estimated in a simulated event sample for the ZZ process. For a given input generator-level $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, the efficiency map provides the probability distribution of the reconstructed $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, accounting for reconstruction and identification efficiency, and the $\mathrm{p_{T}}$ resolution. The x-axis and the y-axis represent bins in the reconstructed and generated lepton $\mathrm{p_{T}}$, respectively.

The SR distributions of the Fundamental $\mathrm{L_{T}+p_{T}^{miss}}$ table for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the type-III seesaw heavy fermions in the flavor-democratic scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\Sigma}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the Fundamental $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the vector-like $\tau$ lepton in the doublet scenario for $\mathrm{m_{\tau'}}$ = 1 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

The SR distributions of the Advanced $\mathrm{S_{T}}$ table for the combined 2016-2018 data set. The detailed description of the bin numbers can be found in Tables 3-6 in the paper. The lower panel shows the ratio of observed events to the total expected background prediction. The gray band on the ratio represents the sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties in the SM background predictions. The expected SM background distributions and the uncertainties are shown before fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. For illustration, an example signal hypothesis for the production of the scalar leptoquark coupled to a top quark and a muon for $\mathrm{m_{S}}$ = 1.4 TeV, before the fit, is also overlaid.

Values of $\Delta Z$ for the discovery sensitivity, as defined in the text, as a function of the invariant mass $\textit{m}$. The j+b-jet invariant mass distribution is calculated in the 10 pb AR. Positive percentages indicate improvements in sensitivity. Horizontal dashed lines are drawn at 100% and 200% to guide the eye. The five benchmark BSM models are (1) charged Higgs boson production in association with a top quark, $tbH^{+}$ with $H^{+} \rightarrow t\bar{b}$; (2) a Kaluza-Klein gauge boson, $W_{KK}$, with the SM $W$ boson and a radion $\phi$; (3) a $Z'$ boson decaying to a composite lepton $E$ and $\ell$, with $E \rightarrow Z\ell$; (4) the sequential standard model $W' \rightarrow W Z' \rightarrow \ell\nu q\bar{q}$; (5) a simplified dark-matter model with an axial-vector mediator $Z' \rightarrow q\bar{q}$, where one of the quarks radiates a $W$ boson decaying to $\ell\nu$. The multiple markers shown for the composite-lepton model at the same invariant mass values correspond to different composite lepton ($E$) masses between 0.25 and 3.5 TeV. The center positions of the markers are set to the masses of the corresponding heavy particles.

Values of $\Delta Z$ for the discovery sensitivity, as defined in the text, as a function of the invariant mass $\textit{m}$. The 2b-jet invariant mass distribution is calculated in the 10 pb AR. Positive percentages indicate improvements in sensitivity. Horizontal dashed lines are drawn at 100% and 200% to guide the eye. The five benchmark BSM models are (1) charged Higgs boson production in association with a top quark, $tbH^{+}$ with $H^{+} \rightarrow t\bar{b}$; (2) a Kaluza-Klein gauge boson, $W_{KK}$, with the SM $W$ boson and a radion $\phi$; (3) a $Z'$ boson decaying to a composite lepton $E$ and $\ell$, with $E \rightarrow Z\ell$; (4) the sequential standard model $W' \rightarrow W Z' \rightarrow \ell\nu q\bar{q}$; (5) a simplified dark-matter model with an axial-vector mediator $Z' \rightarrow q\bar{q}$, where one of the quarks radiates a $W$ boson decaying to $\ell\nu$. The multiple markers shown for the composite-lepton model at the same invariant mass values correspond to different composite lepton ($E$) masses between 0.25 and 3.5 TeV. The center positions of the markers are set to the masses of the corresponding heavy particles.

Values of $\Delta Z$ for the discovery sensitivity, as defined in the text, as a function of the invariant mass $\textit{m}$. The j+e invariant mass distribution is calculated in the 10 pb AR. Positive percentages indicate improvements in sensitivity. Horizontal dashed lines are drawn at 100% and 200% to guide the eye. The five benchmark BSM models are (1) charged Higgs boson production in association with a top quark, $tbH^{+}$ with $H^{+} \rightarrow t\bar{b}$; (2) a Kaluza-Klein gauge boson, $W_{KK}$, with the SM $W$ boson and a radion $\phi$; (3) a $Z'$ boson decaying to a composite lepton $E$ and $\ell$, with $E \rightarrow Z\ell$; (4) the sequential standard model $W' \rightarrow W Z' \rightarrow \ell\nu q\bar{q}$; (5) a simplified dark-matter model with an axial-vector mediator $Z' \rightarrow q\bar{q}$, where one of the quarks radiates a $W$ boson decaying to $\ell\nu$. The multiple markers shown for the composite-lepton model at the same invariant mass values correspond to different composite lepton ($E$) masses between 0.25 and 3.5 TeV. The center positions of the markers are set to the masses of the corresponding heavy particles.

Values of $\Delta Z$ for the discovery sensitivity, as defined in the text, as a function of the invariant mass $\textit{m}$. The b-jet+e invariant mass distribution is calculated in the 10 pb AR. Positive percentages indicate improvements in sensitivity. Horizontal dashed lines are drawn at 100% and 200% to guide the eye. The five benchmark BSM models are (1) charged Higgs boson production in association with a top quark, $tbH^{+}$ with $H^{+} \rightarrow t\bar{b}$; (2) a Kaluza-Klein gauge boson, $W_{KK}$, with the SM $W$ boson and a radion $\phi$; (3) a $Z'$ boson decaying to a composite lepton $E$ and $\ell$, with $E \rightarrow Z\ell$; (4) the sequential standard model $W' \rightarrow W Z' \rightarrow \ell\nu q\bar{q}$; (5) a simplified dark-matter model with an axial-vector mediator $Z' \rightarrow q\bar{q}$, where one of the quarks radiates a $W$ boson decaying to $\ell\nu$. The multiple markers shown for the composite-lepton model at the same invariant mass values correspond to different composite lepton ($E$) masses between 0.25 and 3.5 TeV. The center positions of the markers are set to the masses of the corresponding heavy particles.

Values of $\Delta Z$ for the discovery sensitivity, as defined in the text, as a function of the invariant mass $\textit{m}$. The j+$\gamma$ invariant mass distribution is calculated in the 10 pb AR. Positive percentages indicate improvements in sensitivity. Horizontal dashed lines are drawn at 100% and 200% to guide the eye. The five benchmark BSM models are (1) charged Higgs boson production in association with a top quark, $tbH^{+}$ with $H^{+} \rightarrow t\bar{b}$; (2) a Kaluza-Klein gauge boson, $W_{KK}$, with the SM $W$ boson and a radion $\phi$; (3) a $Z'$ boson decaying to a composite lepton $E$ and $\ell$, with $E \rightarrow Z\ell$; (4) the sequential standard model $W' \rightarrow W Z' \rightarrow \ell\nu q\bar{q}$; (5) a simplified dark-matter model with an axial-vector mediator $Z' \rightarrow q\bar{q}$, where one of the quarks radiates a $W$ boson decaying to $\ell\nu$. The multiple markers shown for the composite-lepton model at the same invariant mass values correspond to different composite lepton ($E$) masses between 0.25 and 3.5 TeV. The center positions of the markers are set to the masses of the corresponding heavy particles.

Values of $\Delta Z$ for the discovery sensitivity, as defined in the text, as a function of the invariant mass $\textit{m}$. The j+$\mu$ invariant mass distribution is calculated in the 10 pb AR. Positive percentages indicate improvements in sensitivity. Horizontal dashed lines are drawn at 100% and 200% to guide the eye. The five benchmark BSM models are (1) charged Higgs boson production in association with a top quark, $tbH^{+}$ with $H^{+} \rightarrow t\bar{b}$; (2) a Kaluza-Klein gauge boson, $W_{KK}$, with the SM $W$ boson and a radion $\phi$; (3) a $Z'$ boson decaying to a composite lepton $E$ and $\ell$, with $E \rightarrow Z\ell$; (4) the sequential standard model $W' \rightarrow W Z' \rightarrow \ell\nu q\bar{q}$; (5) a simplified dark-matter model with an axial-vector mediator $Z' \rightarrow q\bar{q}$, where one of the quarks radiates a $W$ boson decaying to $\ell\nu$. The multiple markers shown for the composite-lepton model at the same invariant mass values correspond to different composite lepton ($E$) masses between 0.25 and 3.5 TeV. The center positions of the markers are set to the masses of the corresponding heavy particles.

Values of $\Delta Z$ for the discovery sensitivity, as defined in the text, as a function of the invariant mass $\textit{m}$. The b-jet+$\mu$ invariant mass distribution is calculated in the 10 pb AR. Positive percentages indicate improvements in sensitivity. Horizontal dashed lines are drawn at 100% and 200% to guide the eye. The five benchmark BSM models are (1) charged Higgs boson production in association with a top quark, $tbH^{+}$ with $H^{+} \rightarrow t\bar{b}$; (2) a Kaluza-Klein gauge boson, $W_{KK}$, with the SM $W$ boson and a radion $\phi$; (3) a $Z'$ boson decaying to a composite lepton $E$ and $\ell$, with $E \rightarrow Z\ell$; (4) the sequential standard model $W' \rightarrow W Z' \rightarrow \ell\nu q\bar{q}$; (5) a simplified dark-matter model with an axial-vector mediator $Z' \rightarrow q\bar{q}$, where one of the quarks radiates a $W$ boson decaying to $\ell\nu$. The multiple markers shown for the composite-lepton model at the same invariant mass values correspond to different composite lepton ($E$) masses between 0.25 and 3.5 TeV. The center positions of the markers are set to the masses of the corresponding heavy particles.

Values of $\Delta Z$ for the discovery sensitivity, as defined in the text, as a function of the invariant mass $\textit{m}$. The b-jet+$\gamma$ invariant mass distribution is calculated in the 10 pb AR. Positive percentages indicate improvements in sensitivity. Horizontal dashed lines are drawn at 100% and 200% to guide the eye. The five benchmark BSM models are (1) charged Higgs boson production in association with a top quark, $tbH^{+}$ with $H^{+} \rightarrow t\bar{b}$; (2) a Kaluza-Klein gauge boson, $W_{KK}$, with the SM $W$ boson and a radion $\phi$; (3) a $Z'$ boson decaying to a composite lepton $E$ and $\ell$, with $E \rightarrow Z\ell$; (4) the sequential standard model $W' \rightarrow W Z' \rightarrow \ell\nu q\bar{q}$; (5) a simplified dark-matter model with an axial-vector mediator $Z' \rightarrow q\bar{q}$, where one of the quarks radiates a $W$ boson decaying to $\ell\nu$. The multiple markers shown for the composite-lepton model at the same invariant mass values correspond to different composite lepton ($E$) masses between 0.25 and 3.5 TeV. The center positions of the markers are set to the masses of the corresponding heavy particles.

The 95% CL upper limits on the cross section times acceptance ($A$), efficiency ($\epsilon$), and branching ratio ($B$) for Gaussian-shaped signals with different signal widths. The limits are calculated for events with at least one lepton with pT > 60 GeV in the 10 pb AR. Two width hypotheses are shown; $\sigma X / mX = 0$ and $\sigma X / mX = 0.15$. In both cases, the detector resolution for jets is included in the simulation of signal samples. The $\pm1 \sigma$ and $\pm2 \sigma$ bands around the expected limit are shown for $\sigma X / mX = 0$ signals. Mass points are spaced 5% apart, relative to the preceding point, starting at 0.3 TeV.

Distributions of the anomaly score from the AE for data and five benchmark BSM models. Their legends, from top to bottom, are; (1) charged Higgs boson production in association with a top quark, $tbH^{+}$ with $H^{+} \rightarrow t\bar{b}$, with the $H^{+}$ mass of 2 TeV; (2) a 6 TeV Kaluza-Klein gauge boson, $W_{KK}$, with the SM $W$ boson and a radion $\phi$; (3) a 4 TeV $Z'$ boson decaying to a composite lepton $E$ with a mass of 0.5 TeV; (4) the sequential standard model $W' \rightarrow WZ' \rightarrow \ell\nu q\bar{q}$, with the $W'$ mass of 6.2 TeV and the $Z'$ mass of 6 TeV; (5) a simplified dark-matter model with an axial-vector mediator $Z' \rightarrow q\bar{q}$, where one of the quarks radiates a $W$ boson decaying to $\ell\nu$ with a mass of 6 TeV. The distributions for the BSM models are smoothed to remove fluctuations due to low MC event counts. The vertical lines indicate the start of the three anomaly regions (ARs). The labels of the three ARs indicate the visible cross section for hypothetical processes yielding the same number of events as observed in the 140 $fb^{-1}$ dataset. The AE is applied to preselected events without any requirements on invariant mass distributions.

Invariant mass distributions of $j+Y$ for $M_{jY}$ > 0.3 TeV after preselection along with the fit from Eq.(1). The fit is represented by red lines, and the associated uncertainties are indicated by yellow bands. The lower panels show the bin-by-bin significances of deviations from the fit, calculated as $(d_{\textit{i}} - f_{\textit{i}}) / \delta_{\textit{i}}$, where $d_{\textit{i}}$ is the data yield, $f_{\textit{i}}$ is the fit value, and $\delta_{i}$ is the uncertainty of data in the $\textit{i}$-th bin

Distributions of the anomaly score for data and several anomaly scenarios. The example BSM model (shown with the dashed blue lines) is the sequential standard model $W' \rightarrow WZ' \rightarrow \ell\nu q\bar{q}$. The mass of $W'$ is set to 2.2 TeV and the mass of the $Z'$ is set to 2 TeV. This model leads to the final state of one lepton, two jets, and small missing transverse energy that is similar to the SM backgrounds. The other histograms represent events from the same model with artificial modifications to represent anomalous events; (1) "Anomaly 1" is the case where all jets beyond the second jet ($N_{j}$ > 2) are replaced with photons; (2) "Anomaly 2" is the case where all jets beyond the second jet are replaced with $b$-jets; (3) "Anomaly 3" is the case of low-multiplicity events where all jets beyond the second jet are removed. The histograms are normalized to unit. The left peak near log(Loss) = -9 visible in Anomaly 1 and 2 is from the events without a third jet.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Events in bins of the $E_{miss}^T$ in the SR.

Correlation matrix associated to the statistical covariance matrix of the data and MC for the primary Lund jet plane density for AK8 jets in a one-dimensional representation with bin indices. The mapping between the bin indices and the physical binning can be imported from the XML file attached to this HepData record using the TUnfoldBinningXML class of ROOT (qualitatively, it corresponds to slicing the Lund plane horizontally from low kT to high kT).

Parametrization of the $A_{X}$ factor, defined as the fraction of diphoton resonances satisfying the fiducial acceptance at the particle level, as function of $m_{X}$ obtained from the narrow width simulated signal samples produced in gluon fusion.

The correction factor, $C_{X}$, defined as the ratio between the number of reconstructed signal events passing the analysis cuts and the number of signal events at the particle level generated within the fiducial volume, and acceptance correction factor, $A_{X}$, defined as the fraction of diphoton resonances satisfying the fiducial acceptance at the particle level. Both are computed for NWA spin-0 models as a function of $m_{X}$.

Effect of event selections on a scalar MC signal sample generated for $m_{X}$ = 15 GeV and on the data. For the MC sample, the efficiencies are shown after applying event weights and a truth level filter that requires two photons with $p^{\gamma\gamma}_{T}>40$ GeV; for the data, the absolute yields are shown. The initial yields for data include a trigger preselection that is the OR of a list of single photon and diphoton triggers. The "2 $loose$ photons" step includes the kinematic acceptance cuts.

Parameterization of the Double Sided Crystal Ball function parameters describing the scalar mass resolution model as a function of $m_{X}$ [GeV].

Postfit score of the $\text{t}\bar{\text{t}}\text{Z}$ output node from the multiclass classifier in $\text{SR}_\text{3l,3j}$ for events with at least 2 b jets

Postfit score of the tWZ output node from the binary classifier in $\text{SR}_\text{3l,2j}$

$\text{p}_\text{T}$ of the leading jet in the $\text{SR}_\text{3l,2j}$

$\text{p}_\text{T}$ of the leading lepton in the $\text{SR}_\text{3l,2j}$

Max $\text{p}_\text{T}$ of the lepton-jet in the $\text{SR}_\text{3l,3j}$

Invariant mass of the system of leptons, jets, and $\vec{\text{p}}^\text{miss}_\text{T}$ in the $\text{SR}_\text{3l,3j}$

Two-dimensional likelihood scan of the signal strenghts of tWZ ($\mu_\text{tWZ}$) vs. $\text{t}\bar{\text{t}}\text{Z}$ ($\mu_{\text{t}\bar{\text{t}}\text{Z}}$). The blue lines show the 68%, 95%, and 99% confidence level contours. The black cross represents the best-fit value, while the red diamond the SM expectation

Two-dimensional likelihood scan of the signal strenghts of tWZ ($\mu_\text{tWZ}$) vs. $\text{t}\bar{\text{t}}\text{Z}$ ($\mu_{\text{t}\bar{\text{t}}\text{Z}}$). The blue lines show the 68%, 95%, and 99% confidence level contours. The black cross represents the best-fit value, while the red diamond the SM expectation

The reconstruction efficiency for caloDPJs produced by the decay of &gamma;_d into e⁺e^- or qq&#772;. The reconstruction efficiency is shown for &gamma;_d with 0&lt;|&eta;|&lt;1.1 as a function of their transverse momentum in events where the &gamma;_d L_xy is between 2&nbsp;m and 4&nbsp;m.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the branching ratio (B) for the decay H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X and ggF selection, for different &gamma;_d masses and a 125&nbsp;GeV Higgs boson. The limits are shown for the SR_2&mu;^ggF, assuming an FRVZ signal model. The hatched band denotes the region in which the branching ratio of H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X is larger than unity.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the branching ratio (B) for the decay H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X and ggF selection, for different &gamma;_d masses and a 125&nbsp;GeV Higgs boson. The limits are shown for the SR_c+&mu;^ggF, assuming an FRVZ signal model. The hatched band denotes the region in which the branching ratio of H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X is larger than unity.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the branching ratio (B) for the decay H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X and ggF selection, for different &gamma;_d masses and a 125&nbsp;GeV Higgs boson. The limits are shown for the SR_2c^ggF, assuming an FRVZ signal model. The hatched band denotes the region in which the branching ratio of H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X is larger than unity.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the branching ratio (B) for the decay H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X and WH selection, for different &gamma;_d masses and a 125&nbsp;GeV Higgs boson. The limits are shown for the SR_c^WH, assuming an FRVZ signal model. The hatched band denotes the region in which the branching ratio of H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X is larger than unity.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the branching ratio (B) for the decay H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X and WH selection, for different &gamma;_d masses and a 125&nbsp;GeV Higgs boson. The limits are shown for the SR_c+&mu;^WH, assuming an FRVZ signal model. The hatched band denotes the region in which the branching ratio of H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X is larger than unity.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the branching ratio (B) for the decay H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X and WH selection, for different &gamma;_d masses and a 125&nbsp;GeV Higgs boson. The limits are shown for the SR_2c^WH, assuming an FRVZ signal model. The hatched band denotes the region in which the branching ratio of H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X is larger than unity.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the branching ratio (B) for the decay H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d and ggF selection, for different &gamma;_d masses and a 125&nbsp;GeV Higgs boson. The limits are shown for the SR_2&mu;^ggF, assuming a HAHM signal model. The hatched band denotes the region in which the branching ratio of H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d is larger than unity.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the branching ratio (B) for the decay H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d and ggF selection, for different &gamma;_d masses and a 125&nbsp;GeV Higgs boson. The limits are shown for the SR_c+&mu;^ggF, assuming a HAHM signal model. The hatched band denotes the region in which the branching ratio of H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d is larger than unity.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the branching ratio (B) for the decay H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d and ggF selection, for different &gamma;_d masses and a 125&nbsp;GeV Higgs boson. The limits are shown for the SR_2c^ggF, assuming a HAHM signal model. The hatched band denotes the region in which the branching ratio of H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d is larger than unity.

The CalRatio 2015--2016 trigger efficiency for the decay of &gamma;_d in e⁺e^- or qq&#772;. The trigger efficiency is shown for &gamma;_d with 0&lt;|&eta;|&lt;1.1 as function of the transverse decay length L_xy.

The CalRatio 2015--2016 trigger efficiency for the decay of &gamma;_d in e⁺e^- or qq&#772;. The trigger efficiency is shown for &gamma;_d with 0&lt;|&eta;|&lt;1.1 as function of the transverse momentum, in events where the &gamma;_d L_xy is between 2&nbsp;m and 4&nbsp;m.

The CalRatio 2017--2018 trigger efficiency for the decay of &gamma;_d in e⁺e^- or qq&#772;. The trigger efficiency is shown for &gamma;_d with 0&lt;|&eta;|&lt;1.1 as function of the transverse decay length L_xy.

The CalRatio 2017--2018 trigger efficiency for the decay of &gamma;_d in e⁺e^- or qq&#772;. The trigger efficiency is shown for &gamma;_d with 0&lt;|&eta;|&lt;1.1 as function of the transverse momentum, in events where the &gamma;_d L_xy is between 2&nbsp;m and 4&nbsp;m.

The narrow-scan 2015--2016 trigger efficiency for the decay of &gamma;_d in &mu;⁺&mu;^-. The trigger efficiency is shown for &gamma;_d with 0&lt;|&eta;|&lt;1.1 as function of the transverse decay length L_xy.

The narrow-scan 2015--2016 trigger efficiency for the decay of &gamma;_d in &mu;⁺&mu;^-. The trigger efficiency is shown for &gamma;_d with 0&lt;|&eta;|&lt;1.1 as function of the transverse momentum, in events where the &gamma;_d L_xy is below 6&nbsp;m.

The narrow-scan 2017--2018 trigger efficiency for the decay of &gamma;_d in &mu;⁺&mu;^-. The trigger efficiency is shown for &gamma;_d with 0&lt;|&eta;|&lt;1.1 as function of the transverse decay length L_xy.

The narrow-scan 2017--2018 trigger efficiency for the decay of &gamma;_d in &mu;⁺&mu;^-. The trigger efficiency is shown for &gamma;_d with 0&lt;|&eta;|&lt;1.1 as function of the transverse momentum, in events where the &gamma;_d L_xy is below 6&nbsp;m.

Efficiency of the cosmic-ray tagger as function of the &gamma;_d transverse decay length. The efficiency is calculated accepting the &mu;DPJs for which the cosmic-ray tagger score is &gt; 0.2 for each associated MS-only track.

Efficiency of the cosmic-ray tagger as function of the &gamma;_d transverse momentum. The efficiency is calculated accepting the &mu;DPJs for which the cosmic-ray tagger score is &gt; 0.2 for each associated MS-only track.

Efficiency of the QCD tagger as function of the &gamma;_d transverse decay length. The efficiency is calculated accepting the caloDPJs for which the QCD tagger score is &gt; 0.5.

Efficiency of the QCD tagger as function of the &gamma;_d transverse momentum. The efficiency is calculated accepting the caloDPJs for which the QCD tagger score is &gt; 0.5.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the FRVZ pp &rarr; H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X process and a SM Higgs boson for the SR_2&mu;^ggF.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the FRVZ pp &rarr; H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X process and a SM Higgs boson for the SR_c+&mu;^ggF.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the FRVZ pp &rarr; H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X process and a SM Higgs boson for the SR_2c^ggF.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the FRVZ pp &rarr; H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X process and a SM Higgs boson for the SR_c^WH.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the FRVZ pp &rarr; H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X process and a SM Higgs boson for the SR_2c^WH.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the FRVZ pp &rarr; H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X process and a SM Higgs boson for the SR_c+&mu;^WH.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies for SR_2&mu;^ggF, as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the FRVZ pp &rarr; H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X process and a Higgs-like scalar with a mass of 800&nbsp;GeV. The coloured bands represent the MC statistical uncertainties.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies for SR_c+&mu;^ggF, as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the FRVZ pp &rarr; H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X process and a Higgs-like scalar with a mass of 800&nbsp;GeV. The coloured bands represent the MC statistical uncertainties.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies for SR_2c;^ggF, as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the FRVZ pp &rarr; H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X process and a Higgs-like scalar with a mass of 800&nbsp;GeV. The coloured bands represent the MC statistical uncertainties.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies for SR_2&mu;^ggF, as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the HAHM H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X process and a SM Higgs boson for the ggF channel.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies for SR_c+&mu;^ggF, as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the HAHM H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X process and a SM Higgs boson for the ggF channel.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies for SR_2c;^ggF, as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the HAHM H&rarr;&nbsp;2&gamma;_d+X process and a SM Higgs boson for the ggF channel.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies for SR_2&mu;^ggF, as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the FRVZ pp &rarr; H&rarr;&nbsp;4&gamma;_d+X process and a Higgs-like scalar with a mass of 800&nbsp;GeV. The coloured bands represent the MC statistical uncertainties.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies for SR_c+&mu;^ggF, as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the FRVZ pp &rarr; H&rarr;&nbsp;4&gamma;_d+X process and a Higgs-like scalar with a mass of 800&nbsp;GeV. The coloured bands represent the MC statistical uncertainties.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies for SR_2c;^ggF, as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the FRVZ pp &rarr; H&rarr;&nbsp;4&gamma;_d+X process and a Higgs-like scalar with a mass of 800&nbsp;GeV. The coloured bands represent the MC statistical uncertainties.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies for SR_2&mu;^ggF, as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the FRVZ pp &rarr; H&rarr;&nbsp;4&gamma;_d+X process and a SM Higgs boson. The coloured bands represent the MC statistical uncertainties.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies for SR_c+&mu;^ggF, as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the FRVZ pp &rarr; H&rarr;&nbsp;4&gamma;_d+X process and a SM Higgs boson. The coloured bands represent the MC statistical uncertainties.

The extrapolated acceptance times efficiencies for SR_2c;^ggF, as a function of the &gamma;_d mean proper lifetime c&tau; for the FRVZ pp &rarr; H&rarr;&nbsp;4&gamma;_d+X process and a SM Higgs boson. The coloured bands represent the MC statistical uncertainties.

Observed limits at the 95% CL on the branching ratio (B), obtained from the SR_2&mu;^ggF, for the process pp &rarr; H&rarr;&nbsp;4&gamma;_d+X, for different &gamma;_d masses and a 125 GeV Higgs boson. The limits are shown assuming an FRVZ signal model.