The minus $1\sigma$ variation of observed exclusion contour obtained by varying the signal cross section within its uncertainty. The contour is given as a function of the $\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ vs. $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}$.

The plus $1\sigma$ variation of observed exclusion contour obtained by varying the signal cross section within its uncertainty. The contour is given as a function of the $\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ vs. $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}$.

The minus $1\sigma$ variation of expected exclusion contour obtained by varying MC statistical uncertainties, detector-related systematic uncertainties, and theoretical uncertainties (excluding signal cross section uncertainties). The contour is given as a function of the $\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ vs. $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}$.

The plus $1\sigma$ variation of expected exclusion contour obtained by varying MC statistical uncertainties, detector-related systematic uncertainties, and theoretical uncertainties (excluding signal cross section uncertainties). The contour is given as a function of the $\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ vs. $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}$.

The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $\it{m}_{LQ_{3}^{u}}$ vs. $\mathrm{BR}(\it{m}_{LQ_{3}^{u}}\rightarrow b \tau)$. Points that are within the contours are excluded.

The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $\it{m}_{LQ_{3}^{u}}$ vs. $\mathrm{BR}(\it{m}_{LQ_{3}^{u}}\rightarrow b \tau)$. Points that are within the contours are excluded.

The minus $1\sigma$ variation of observed exclusion contour obtained by varying the signal cross section within its uncertainty. The contour is given as a function of the $\it{m}_{LQ_{3}^{u}}$ vs. $\mathrm{BR}(\it{m}_{LQ_{3}^{u}}\rightarrow b \tau)$

The plus $1\sigma$ variation of observed exclusion contour obtained by varying the signal cross section within its uncertainty. The contour is given as a function of the $\it{m}_{LQ_{3}^{u}}$ vs. $\mathrm{BR}(\it{m}_{LQ_{3}^{u}}\rightarrow b \tau)$

The plus $1\sigma$ variation of expected exclusion contour obtained by varying MC statistical uncertainties, detector-related systematic uncertainties, and theoretical uncertainties (excluding signal cross section uncertainties). The contour is given as a function of the $\it{m}_{LQ_{3}^{u}}$ vs. $\mathrm{BR}(\it{m}_{LQ_{3}^{u}}\rightarrow b \tau)$

The minus $1\sigma$ variation of expected exclusion contour obtained by varying MC statistical uncertainties, detector-related systematic uncertainties, and theoretical uncertainties (excluding signal cross section uncertainties). The contour is given as a function of the $\it{m}_{LQ_{3}^{u}}$ vs. $\mathrm{BR}(\it{m}_{LQ_{3}^{u}}\rightarrow b \tau)$

Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ signal grid. The column titled 'Leading Region' stores information on which of the fit regions (SRA-B, SRC or SRD) is the dominant based on the expected CLs values.

Expected model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ signal grid. The column titled 'Leading Region' stores information on which of the fit regions (SRA-B, SRC or SRD) is the dominant based on the expected CLs values.

Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $LQ_{3}^{u}$ signal grid with $\mathrm{BR}(\it{m}_{LQ_{3}^{u}}\rightarrow b \tau))=0$ %. Only the SRA-B fit region is considered in this interpretation.

Expected model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $LQ_{3}^{u}$ signal grid with $\mathrm{BR}(\it{m}_{LQ_{3}^{u}}\rightarrow b \tau))=0$ %. Only the SRA-B fit region is considered in this interpretation.

The distributions of $S$ in SRA-TW. For each bin yields for the data, total SM prediction and a representative signal point are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the MC statistical uncertainties, labeled 'stat', and the remaining uncertainties, labeled 'syst' that include detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The signal predictions is provided with the MC statistical uncertainties only. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.

The distributions of $\it{m}^{\mathrm{R=1.2}}_{1}$ in SRB-TT. For each bin yields for the data, total SM prediction and a representative signal point are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the MC statistical uncertainties, labeled 'stat', and the remaining uncertainties, labeled 'syst' that include detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The signal predictions is provided with the MC statistical uncertainties only. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.

The distributions of R$_{ISR}$ in SRC signal regions before R$_{ISR}$ cuts are applied. For each bin yields for the data, total SM prediction and a representative signal point are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the MC statistical uncertainties, labeled 'stat', and the remaining uncertainties, labeled 'syst' that include detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The signal predictions is provided with the MC statistical uncertainties only. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.

The distributions of $E^{miss}_{T}/\sqrt{H_{T}}$ in SRD0. For each bin yields for the data, total SM prediction and a representative signal point are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the MC statistical uncertainties, labeled 'stat', and the remaining uncertainties, labeled 'syst' that include detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The signal predictions is provided with the MC statistical uncertainties only. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.

The distributions of $E^{miss}_{T}/\sqrt{H_{T}}$ in SRD1. For each bin yields for the data, total SM prediction and a representative signal point are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the MC statistical uncertainties, labeled 'stat', and the remaining uncertainties, labeled 'syst' that include detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The signal predictions is provided with the MC statistical uncertainties only. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.

The distributions of $E^{miss}_{T}/\sqrt{H_{T}}$ in SRD2. For each bin yields for the data, total SM prediction and a representative signal point are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the MC statistical uncertainties, labeled 'stat', and the remaining uncertainties, labeled 'syst' that include detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The signal predictions is provided with the MC statistical uncertainties only. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.

Cutflow for the reference point $(\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}, \it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}})= (1300,1)\ \mathrm{GeV} $ in SRA-TT. The column labelled ''Weighted yield'' shows the results including all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 139 fb$^{-1}$. A notable exception concerns results in the first row, labelled ''Total'', that corresponds to plain $\sigma \cdot \mathcal{L}$ expected. The ''Derivation skim'' includes the requirements that $H_{T}$, the scalar sum of $p_{T}$ of jets and leptons, $H_{T}>150\ \mathrm{GeV}$ or that a ''baseline'' electron or muon has $p_{T}>20\ \mathrm{GeV}$. The definition of ''baseline'' electron/muons, lepton and $\tau$ vetos are described in the main body of the paper. In total 30000 raw MC events were generated prior to the specified cuts, with the column ''Unweighted yield'' collecting the numbers after each cut.

Cutflow for the reference point $(\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}, \it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}})= (1300,1)\ \mathrm{GeV} $ in SRA-TW. The column labelled ''Weighted yield'' shows the results including all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 139 fb$^{-1}$. A notable exception concerns results in the first row, labelled ''Total'', that corresponds to plain $\sigma \cdot \mathcal{L}$ expected. The ''Derivation skim'' includes the requirements that $H_{T}$, the scalar sum of $p_{T}$ of jets and leptons, $H_{T}>150\ \mathrm{GeV}$ or that a ''baseline'' electron or muon has $p_{T}>20\ \mathrm{GeV}$. The definition of ''baseline'' electron/muons, lepton and $\tau$ vetos are described in the main body of the paper. In total 30000 raw MC events were generated prior to the specified cuts, with the column ''Unweighted yield'' collecting the numbers after each cut.

Cutflow for the reference point $(\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}, \it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}})= (1300,1)\ \mathrm{GeV} $ in SRA-T0. The column labelled ''Weighted yield'' shows the results including all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 139 fb$^{-1}$. A notable exception concerns results in the first row, labelled ''Total'', that corresponds to plain $\sigma \cdot \mathcal{L}$ expected. The ''Derivation skim'' includes the requirements that $H_{T}$, the scalar sum of $p_{T}$ of jets and leptons, $H_{T}>150\ \mathrm{GeV}$ or that a ''baseline'' electron or muon has $p_{T}>20\ \mathrm{GeV}$. The definition of ''baseline'' electron/muons, lepton and $\tau$ vetos are described in the main body of the paper. In total 30000 raw MC events were generated prior to the specified cuts, with the column ''Unweighted yield'' collecting the numbers after each cut.

Cutflow for the reference point $(\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}, \it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}})= (700,400)\ \mathrm{GeV} $ in signal regions SRB-TT, SRB-TW and SRB-T0. The regions differ by the last cut applied. The column labelled ''Weighted yield'' shows the results including all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 139 fb$^{-1}$. A notable exception concerns results in the first row, labelled ''Total'', that corresponds to plain $\sigma \cdot \mathcal{L}$ expected. The ''Derivation skim'' includes the requirements that $H_{T}$, the scalar sum of $p_{T}$ of jets and leptons, $H_{T}>150\ \mathrm{GeV}$ or that a ''baseline'' electron or muon has $p_{T}>20\ \mathrm{GeV}$. The definition of ''baseline'' electron/muons, lepton and $\tau$ vetos are described in the main body of the paper. In total 60000 raw MC events were generated prior to the specified cuts, with the column ''Unweighted yield'' collecting the numbers after each cut.

Cutflow for the reference point $(\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}, \it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}})= (500,327)\ \mathrm{GeV} $ in regions SRC-1, SRC-2, SRC-3, SRC-4 and SRC-5. The regions differ by the last cut applied. The column labelled ''Weighted yield'' shows the results including all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 139 fb$^{-1}$. A notable exception concerns results in the first row, labelled ''Total'', that corresponds to plain $\sigma \cdot \mathcal{L}$ expected. The ''Derivation skim'' includes the requirements that $H_{T}$, the scalar sum of $p_{T}$ of jets and leptons, $H_{T}>150\ \mathrm{GeV}$ or that a ''baseline'' electron or muon has $p_{T}>20\ \mathrm{GeV}$. The definition of ''baseline'' electron/muons, lepton and $\tau$ vetos are described in the main body of the paper. In total 150000 raw MC events with filter efficiency of 0.384 were generated prior to the specified cuts, with the column ''Unweighted yield'' collecting the numbers after each cut.

Cutflow for the reference point $(\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}, \it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}})= (550,500)\ \mathrm{GeV} $ in SRD0. The column labelled ''Weighted yield'' shows the results including all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 139 fb$^{-1}$. A notable exception concerns results in the first row, labelled ''Total'', that corresponds to plain $\sigma \cdot \mathcal{L}$ expected. The ''Derivation skim'' includes the requirements that $H_{T}$, the scalar sum of $p_{T}$ of jets and leptons, $H_{T}>150\ \mathrm{GeV}$ or that a ''baseline'' electron or muon has $p_{T}>20\ \mathrm{GeV}$. The definition of ''baseline'' electron/muons, lepton and $\tau$ vetos are described in the main body of the paper. In total 90000 raw MC events with filter efficiency of 0.428 were generated prior to the specified cuts, with the column ''Unweighted yield'' collecting the numbers after each cut.

Cutflow for the reference point $(\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}, \it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}})= (550,500)\ \mathrm{GeV} $ in SRD1. The column labelled ''Weighted yield'' shows the results including all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 139 fb$^{-1}$. A notable exception concerns results in the first row, labelled ''Total'', that corresponds to plain $\sigma \cdot \mathcal{L}$ expected. The ''Derivation skim'' includes the requirements that $H_{T}$, the scalar sum of $p_{T}$ of jets and leptons, $H_{T}>150\ \mathrm{GeV}$ or that a ''baseline'' electron or muon has $p_{T}>20\ \mathrm{GeV}$. The definition of ''baseline'' electron/muons, lepton and $\tau$ vetos are described in the main body of the paper. In total 90000 raw MC events with filter efficiency of 0.428 were generated prior to the specified cuts, with the column ''Unweighted yield'' collecting the numbers after each cut.

Cutflow for the reference point $(\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}, \it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}})= (550,500)\ \mathrm{GeV} $ in SRD2. The column labelled ''Weighted yield'' shows the results including all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 139 fb$^{-1}$. A notable exception concerns results in the first row, labelled ''Total'', that corresponds to plain $\sigma \cdot \mathcal{L}$ expected. The ''Derivation skim'' includes the requirements that $H_{T}$, the scalar sum of $p_{T}$ of jets and leptons, $H_{T}>150\ \mathrm{GeV}$ or that a ''baseline'' electron or muon has $p_{T}>20\ \mathrm{GeV}$. The definition of ''baseline'' electron/muons, lepton and $\tau$ vetos are described in the main body of the paper. In total 90000 raw MC events with filter efficiency of 0.428 were generated prior to the specified cuts, with the column ''Unweighted yield'' collecting the numbers after each cut.

Signal acceptance in SRA-TT for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$

Signal efficiency in SRA-TT for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the efficiency in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance in SRA-TW for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$

Signal efficiency in SRA-TW for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the efficiency in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance in SRA-T0 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$

Signal efficiency in SRA-T0 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the efficiency in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance in SRB-TT for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$

Signal efficiency in SRB-TT for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the efficiency in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance in SRB-TW for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$

Signal efficiency in SRB-TW for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the efficiency in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance in SRB-T0 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$

Signal efficiency in SRB-T0 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the efficiency in the table is reported in %.

Signal acceptance in SRC1 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{5}$ and the results are given here in the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane as opposed to the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\Delta(\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}},\it{m}_{\tilde{t}})$ one showed in the paper plot.

Signal efficiency in SRC1 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the efficiency in the table is reported in % and the results are given here in the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane as opposed to the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\Delta(\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}},\it{m}_{\tilde{t}})$ one showed in the paper plot.

Signal acceptance in SRC2 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{5}$ and the results are given here in the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane as opposed to the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\Delta(\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}},\it{m}_{\tilde{t}})$ one showed in the paper plot.

Signal efficiency in SRC2 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the efficiency in the table is reported in % and the results are given here in the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane as opposed to the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\Delta(\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}},\it{m}_{\tilde{t}})$ one showed in the paper plot.

Signal acceptance in SRC3 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{5}$ and the results are given here in the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane as opposed to the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\Delta(\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}},\it{m}_{\tilde{t}})$ one showed in the paper plot.

Signal efficiency in SRC3 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the efficiency in the table is reported in % and the results are given here in the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane as opposed to the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\Delta(\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}},\it{m}_{\tilde{t}})$ one showed in the paper plot.

Signal acceptance in SRC4 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{5}$ and the results are given here in the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane as opposed to the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\Delta(\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}},\it{m}_{\tilde{t}})$ one showed in the paper plot.

Signal efficiency in SRC4 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the efficiency in the table is reported in % and the results are given here in the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane as opposed to the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\Delta(\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}},\it{m}_{\tilde{t}})$ plane showed in the paper plot.

Signal acceptance in SRC5 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{5}$ and the results are given here in the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane as opposed to the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\Delta(\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}},\it{m}_{\tilde{t}})$ plane showed in the paper plot.

Signal efficiency in SRC5 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the efficiency in the table is reported in % and the results are given here in the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane as opposed to the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\Delta(\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}},\it{m}_{\tilde{t}})$ one showed in the paper plot.

Signal acceptance in SRD0 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{5}$ and the results are given here in the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane as opposed to the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\Delta(\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}},\it{m}_{\tilde{t}})$ one showed in the paper plot.

Signal efficiency in SRD0 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the efficiency in the table is reported in % and the results are given here in the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane as opposed to the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\Delta(\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}},\it{m}_{\tilde{t}})$ one showed in the paper plot.

Signal acceptance in SRD1 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{5}$ and the results are given here in the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane as opposed to the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\Delta(\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}},\it{m}_{\tilde{t}})$ one showed in the paper plot.

Signal efficiency in SRD1 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the efficiency in the table is reported in % and the results are given here in the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane as opposed to the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\Delta(\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}},\it{m}_{\tilde{t}})$ one showed in the paper plot.

Signal acceptance in SRD2 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{5}$ and the results are given here in the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane as opposed to the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\Delta(\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}},\it{m}_{\tilde{t}})$ one showed in the paper plot.

Signal efficiency in SRD2 for simplified $(\tilde{t},\tilde{\chi^{0}_1})$ model. Please mind that the efficiency in the table is reported in % and the results are given here in the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}}$ plane as opposed to the $\it{m}_{\tilde{t}}-\Delta(\it{m}_{\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}},\it{m}_{\tilde{t}})$ one showed in the paper plot.

Observed and expected 95% credibility-level upper limits on the cross-section times branching ratio for the simplified dark-matter model. The table also shows the corresponding $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ bands for the expected limits. The limits are calculated using jets in events with at least one isolated lepton ($e$ or $\mu$) with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV.

The 95% CL upper limits on the cross-section times acceptance times efficiency times branching ratio, as a function of the resonance mass, $m_X$. The limits are calculated using jets in events with at least one isolated lepton ($e$ or $\mu$) with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV. The limits are shown for a generic Gaussian signal with the width $\sigma_{X}/m_{X} =0$. The table also shows the expected limits and the corresponding $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ bands. The tabulated data has been used in Figure 04 of the publication.

The 95% CL upper limits on the cross-section times acceptance times efficiency times branching ratio, as a function of the resonance mass, $m_X$. The limits are calculated using jets in events with at least one isolated lepton ($e$ or $\mu$) with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV. The limits are shown for a generic Gaussian signal with the width $\sigma_{X}/m_{X} =0.05$. The table also shows the expected limits and the corresponding $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ bands. The tabulated data has been used in Figure 04 of the publication.

The 95% CL upper limits on the cross-section times acceptance times efficiency times branching ratio, as a function of the resonance mass, $m_X$. The limits are calculated using jets in events with at least one isolated lepton ($e$ or $\mu$) with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV. The limits are shown for a generic Gaussian signal with the width $\sigma_{X}/m_{X} =0.10$. The table also shows the expected limits and the corresponding $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ bands. The tabulated data has been used in Figure 04 of the publication.

The 95% CL upper limits on the cross-section times acceptance times efficiency times branching ratio, as a function of the resonance mass, $m_X$. The limits are calculated using jets in events with at least one isolated lepton ($e$ or $\mu$) with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV. The limits are shown for a generic Gaussian signal with the width $\sigma_{X}/m_{X} =0.15$. The table also shows the expected limits and the corresponding $1\sigma$ and $2\sigma$ bands. The tabulated data has been used in Figure 04 of the publication.

Truth-level cross-sections ($\sigma$), acceptances ($A$), detector efficiencies ($\epsilon$) and the detector-level visible cross-sections ($\sigma^{vis}$) for different masses of the $\rho_T$ model. Only statistical uncertainties on the acceptances and efficiencies are shown. The acceptance is defined by requiring jets with $m_{jj} >216$ GeV and $|\eta|<2.4$, as well as isolated leptons ($e$ or $\mu$) with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV and $|\eta^\mu|<2.5$ ($|\eta^e|<2.47$, excluding of the gap region 1.37--1.52) for muons (electrons). The tabulated data has been used in Figure 05a of the publication.

Truth-level cross-sections ($\sigma$), acceptances ($A$), detector efficiencies ($\epsilon$) and the detector-level visible cross-sections ($\sigma^{vis}$) for different masses of the $W'/Z'$ SSM model. Only statistical uncertainties on the acceptances and efficiencies are shown. The acceptance is defined by requiring jets with $m_{jj} >216$ GeV and $|\eta|<2.4$, as well as leptons with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV and $|\eta^\mu|<2.5$ ($|\eta^e|<2.47$ with exclusion of the gap region 1.37-1.52) for muons (electrons). The tabulated data has been used in Figure 05b of the publication.

Truth-level cross-sections ($\sigma$), acceptances ($A$), detector efficiencies ($\epsilon$) and the detector-level visible cross-sections ($\sigma^{vis}$) for different masses of the $H^+$ model for $\tan \beta=1$. Only statistical uncertainties on the acceptances and efficiencies are shown. The acceptance correction was calculated assuming $\tan \beta=1$ and the narrow-width approximation. The acceptance is defined by requiring jets with $m_{jj} >216$ GeV and $|\eta|<2.4$, as well as leptons with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV and $|\eta^\mu|<2.5$ ($|\eta^e|<2.47$ with exclusion of the gap region 1.37-1.52) for muons (electrons). The tabulated data has been used in Figure 05c of the publication.

Truth-level cross-sections ($\sigma$), acceptances ($A$), detector efficiencies ($\epsilon$) and the detector-level visible cross-sections ($\sigma^{vis}$) for different masses of the $Z'$ (DM) model. Only statistical uncertainties on the acceptances and efficiencies are shown. The acceptance is defined by requiring jets with $m_{jj} > 216$ GeV and $|\eta|<2.4$, as well as leptons with $p_\text{T}^\ell \ge 60$ GeV and $|\eta^\mu|<2.5$ ($|\eta^e|<2.47$ with exclusion of the gap region 1.37-1.52) for muons (electrons). The tabulated data has been used in Figure 05d of the publication.

Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the cross-sections of narrow resonance $X$ to $HH$ as a function of the mass $m_{X}$.

Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the cross-sections of broad resonance $X$ to $HH$ as a function of the mass $m_{X}$.

Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the cross-sections of non-resonant $HH$ production via VBF as a function of the di-vector-boson-di-Higgs-boson coupling modifier $\kappa_{2V}$. The theory prediction of the cross-section as a function of $\kappa_{2V}$ is also shown. The minimum theory cross-section is 1.37 fb at $\kappa_{2V}=1.17$.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 0.2 ns and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV) in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in electroweak channel in the low-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}} = 500 GeV$) in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in strong channel in the low-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 0.2 ns and $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV) in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in electroweak channel in the high-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of fake tracklet in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of muon background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of hadron and electron background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of signal ($m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}} = 500 GeV$) in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of total background in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.

Pixel-tracklet $p_{T}$ spectrum of observed data in strong channel in the high-Emiss region.

Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).

Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).

Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 0.2 ns.

Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 0.2 ns.

Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 1.0 ns.

Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the strong production channel in terms of the gluino and chargino masses. The limit is shown assuming a chargino lifetime 1.0 ns.

Expected exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).

Observed exclusion limit at 95% CL obtained in the electroweak production channel in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).

Model dependent upper limits on cross-section (fb) for the electroweak production are shown by grey numbers in terms of the chargino lifetime ($\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) and mass ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$).

Total acceptance $\times$ efficiency of the electroweak channel. The total signal acceptance $\times$ efficiency is defined as the probability of an event passing the signal region selection when an electroweak gaugino pair is produced in a pp collision.

Total acceptance $\times$ efficiency of the strong channel. In white regions, no simulation sample is available. The left-upper triangle region is not allowed kinematically in wino-LSP scenarios. The total signal acceptance $\times$ efficiency is calculated relative to events in which the gluinos decay into electroweak gaugino pairs.

The generator-level acceptance after reconstruction, for selecting and reconstructing charginos as a function of the chargino $eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level).

The generator-level acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction, for selecting and reconstructing charginos as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level). The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction is the probability of a signal event, which passes all the event-level requirements, passing all the track/tracklet requirements after reconstruction.

The generator-level acceptance after reconstruction, for selecting and reconstructing charginos as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level).

The generator-level acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction, for selecting and reconstructing charginos as a function of the chargino $\eta$ and chargino decay radius (at generator level). The acceptance $\times$ efficiency after reconstruction is the probability of a signal event, which passes all the event-level requirements, passing all the track/tracklet requirements after reconstruction.

Summary of the selection criteria, and the corresponding observed number of events in data as well as the expected number of signal events in simulation for two benchmark models: a chargino produced in direct electroweak production with ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (400 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. The expected number of signal events is normalised to 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$. The signal selection efficiencies are also shown in parentheses. The first row shows the number of events after the application of detector and data quality conditions. Requirements below the dashed line are applied to tracks and tracklets.

Summary of the selection criteria, and the corresponding observed number of events in data as well as the expected number of signal events in simulation for two benchmark models: a chargino produced in the strong channel with ($m_{\tilde{g}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1600 GeV, 500 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. The expected number of signal events is normalised to 36.1 fb${}^{-1}$. The signal selection efficiencies are also shown in parentheses. The first row shows the number of events after the application of detector and data quality conditions. Requirements below the dashed line are applied to tracks and tracklets.

The event and tracklet generator-level acceptance and selection efficiency for a few electroweak signal models studied in this search. The last column shows the probability ($P$) for a reconstructed tracklet to have $p_{T}$ greater than 100 GeV.

The event and tracklet generator-level acceptance and selection efficiency for a few strong signal models studied in this search. The last column shows the probability ($P$) for a reconstructed tracklet to have $p_{T}$ greater than 100 GeV.

Systematic uncertainties in the signal event yields at $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV for the electroweak channel and at $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 500 GeV for the strong channel. The lifetime of the chargino is not relevant here. The uncertainty in the cross-section of the strong production is large due to the large effect from the PDF uncertainty.

Observed events, expected background for null signal, and expected signal yields for two benchmark models: electroweak channel with ($m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (400 GeV, 0.2 ns) and strong channel with ($m_{\tilde{g}}$, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$, $\tau_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$) = (1600 GeV, 500 GeV, 0.2 ns) in the high-Emiss region. Also shown are the probability of a background-only experiment being more signal-like than observed ($p_0$) and the upper limit on the model-independent visible cross-section at 95\% CL. The uncertainty in the total background yield is different from the sum of uncertainties in quadrature due to anticorrelation between different backgrounds.

Effects of systematic uncertainties on the signal exclusion significance at $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 400 GeV for the electroweak channel and at $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1600 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 500 GeV for the strong channel. The lifetime of the chargino is not relevant here. Effects of uncertainties on the fake-tracklet background is smaller in the strong channel analysis because the estimated number of the fake-tracket background events is small.

Cross-section upper limits for the strong production, presented in unit of fb. Left-upper triangle region is unphysical because the wino mass is larger than the gluino mass.

Lower limits at 95$\%$ CL on $\Lambda$ for the dimuon channel for different signal chiralities in the (constructive/destructive interference) SRs of the analysis.

Lower limits at 95$\%$ CL on $\Lambda$ for the dilepton combination for different signal chiralities in the (constructive/destructive interference) SRs of the analysis.

The dielectron data events passing the full selection.

The dimuon data events passing the full selection.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the c-tag Signal Region of the $ ce$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the b-tag Signal Region of the $ ce$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the untagged Signal Region of the $ c\mu$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the c-tag Signal Region of the $ c\mu$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the b-tag Signal Region of the $ c\mu$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the 0-tag Signal Region of the $ be$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the 1-tag Signal Region of the $ be$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the 2-tag Signal Region of the $ be$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the 0-tag Signal Region of the $ b\mu$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the 1-tag Signal Region of the $ b\mu$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

Distribution of the resonance mass in the 2-tag Signal Region of the $ b\mu$ channel for the post-fit background, the observed data, and the expected signal with $m_{LQ} = 1$ TeV.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark pair production cross-section at 95% CL for $\mathcal{B}=1$ into electrons, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $qe$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark pair production cross-section at 95% CL for $\mathcal{B}=1$ into muons, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $q\mu$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark pair production cross-section at 95% CL for $\mathcal{B}=1$ into electrons, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $ce$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark pair production cross-section at 95% CL for $\mathcal{B}=1$ into muons, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $c\mu$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark pair production cross-section at 95% CL for $\mathcal{B}=1$ into electrons, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $be$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark pair production cross-section at 95% CL for $\mathcal{B}=1$ into muons, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $b\mu$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark branching ratio at 95% CL, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $qe$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark branching ratio at 95% CL, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $q\mu$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark branching ratio at 95% CL, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $ce$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark branching ratio at 95% CL, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $c\mu$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark branching ratio at 95% CL, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $be$ channel.

The observed and expected limits on the leptoquark branching ratio at 95% CL, shown as a function of $m_{LQ}$ for the $b\mu$ channel.

The signal selection efficiency x acceptance summed over all signal regions, for all masses and LQ decay channels considered.

The observed and expected limits for all masses and LQ decay channels considered.

Cutflow Table in the electron channel, considering signal samples with LQ mass of 1 TeV.

Cutflow Table in the muon channel, considering signal samples with LQ mass of 1 TeV.

Summary of results for charm and bottom muon v2 as a function of pT. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Ratio of unfolded width of azimuthal angular correlation distributions (P PB/ P P). Different colors correspond to different combinations of p_{T,1} and p_{T,2}

Ratio of unfolded Dijet conditional yields (P PB/ P P). Different colors correspond to different combinations of p_{T,1} and p_{T,2}

Unfolded width of azimuthal angular correlation distributions (Delta p_{T} > 3). Full markers represent p+Pb, open markers p+p

Unfolded Dijet conditional yields (Delta p_{T} > 3). Full markers represent p+Pb, open markers p+p

Ratio of unfolded width of azimuthal angular correlation distributions (P PB/ P P) (Delta p_{T} > 3). Different colors correspond to different combinations of p_{T,1} and p_{T,2}

Ratio of unfolded Dijet conditional yields (P PB/ P P) (Delta p_{T} > 3). Different colors correspond to different combinations of p_{T,1} and p_{T,2}

Unfolded azimuthal angular correlation distributions. Black markers represent p+Pb, red markers p+p

Unfolded azimuthal angular correlation distributions (Delta p_{T} > 3). Black markers represent p+Pb, red markers p+p

Observed $m_{t\bar{t}}^{reco}$ distributions in data for SR$2b$, shown together with the result of the fit with the three-shape-parameter function. The error bars indicate the effect of the fit parameter uncertainty on the background prediction. The bin width of the distributions is chosen to be the same as that used in the background parameterization.

Observed and expected upper limits on the cross-section times branching fraction of the $Z'_{TC2} \rightarrow t\bar{t}$ as a function of the $Z'_{TC2}$ mass ($\Gamma/m = 1.2$%).

Fit parameter values obtained from fits to data in the two signal regions. The fit function is $f(x) = p_{0} (1-x)^{p_{1}} x^{p_{2} + p_{3} \log(x)}$, where $x = m^{reco}_{t\bar{t}}/\sqrt{s}$.

Post-fit BDT distributions after the VBF event selection for the $\tau_{\mathrm{had}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ analysis channel. The VBF signal is shown for $\mu = 0.73$ and $\tilde d = -0.01$. ''Other bkg'' denotes all background contributions not listed explicitly in the legend. The size of the combined statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties is given.

Post-fit $m_{\tau\tau}^{\mathrm{MMC}}$ distributions in the low BDT score CR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}$ SF analysis channel. ''Other bkg'' denotes all background contributions not listed explicitly in the legend. The size of the combined statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties is given. The exact value of the $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ cut on the leptons depends on the trigger.

Post-fit $m_{\tau\tau}^{\mathrm{MMC}}$ distributions in the low BDT score CR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}$ DF analysis channel. ''Other bkg'' denotes all background contributions not listed explicitly in the legend. The size of the combined statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties is given.

Post-fit $m_{\tau\tau}^{\mathrm{MMC}}$ distributions in the low BDT score CR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ analysis channel. ''Other bkg'' denotes all background contributions not listed explicitly in the legend. The size of the combined statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties is given. The exact value of the $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ cut on the leading lepton depends on the trigger.

Post-fit $m_{\tau\tau}^{\mathrm{MMC}}$ distributions in the low BDT score CR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{had}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ analysis channel. ''Other bkg'' denotes all background contributions not listed explicitly in the legend. The size of the combined statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties is given.

Post-fit Optimal Observable distributions in the low BDT score CR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}$ SF analysis channel. ''Other bkg'' denotes all background contributions not listed explicitly in the legend. The size of the combined statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties is given. The exact value of the $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ cut on the leptons depends on the trigger.

Post-fit Optimal Observable distributions in the low BDT score CR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}$ DF analysis channel. ''Other bkg'' denotes all background contributions not listed explicitly in the legend. The size of the combined statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties is given.

Post-fit Optimal Observable distributions in the low BDT score CR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ analysis channel. ''Other bkg'' denotes all background contributions not listed explicitly in the legend. The size of the combined statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties is given. The exact value of the $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ cut on the leading lepton depends on the trigger.

Post-fit Optimal Observable distributions in the low BDT score CR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{had}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ analysis channel. ''Other bkg'' denotes all background contributions not listed explicitly in the legend. The size of the combined statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties is given.

Post-fit distributions of the event yields as a function of the Optimal Observable in the SR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}$ SF analysis channel. The values of $\tilde d$, the signal strength $\mu$, the normalization of background processes, and nuisance parameters for the event yield prediction are set to those which minimize the NLL. The size of the combined statistical, experimental and theoretical uncertainties is given.

Post-fit distributions of the event yields as a function of the Optimal Observable in the SR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}$ DF analysis channel. The values of $\tilde d$, the signal strength $\mu$, the normalization of background processes, and nuisance parameters for the event yield prediction are set to those which minimize the NLL. The size of the combined statistical, experimental and theoretical uncertainties is given.

Post-fit distributions of the event yields as a function of the Optimal Observable in the SR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ analysis channel. The values of $\tilde d$, the signal strength $\mu$, the normalization of background processes, and nuisance parameters for the event yield prediction are set to those which minimize the NLL. The size of the combined statistical, experimental and theoretical uncertainties is given. The exact value of the $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ cut on the leading lepton depends on the trigger.

Post-fit distributions of the event yields as a function of the Optimal Observable in the SR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{had}}\tau_{\mathrm{had}}$ analysis channel. The values of $\tilde d$, the signal strength $\mu$, the normalization of background processes, and nuisance parameters for the event yield prediction are set to those which minimize the NLL. The size of the combined statistical, experimental and theoretical uncertainties is given.

The observed $\Delta\mathrm{NLL}$ curve as a function of $\tilde d$ values. For comparison, expected $\Delta\mathrm{NLL}$ curves are also shown. The constraints on the nuisance parameters and normalization factors are first determined in a CR-only fit, and then a fit to pseudo-data corresponding to these nuisance parameters, normalization factors, and to $\tilde d=0, \mu = 1$ or $\tilde d =0, \mu = 0.73$ is performed to obtain these $\Delta\mathrm{NLL}$ curves. Moreover, a pre-fit expected $\Delta\mathrm{NLL}$ is shown, using pseudo-data corresponding to $\tilde d =0$ and $\mu = 1$ in the signal and control regions.

The expected $\Delta\mathrm{NLL}$ curves comparing the sensitivity of the fit with and without systematic uncertainties. For comparison, other curves are shown which remove the effect of jet-based systematic uncertainties, $\tau$-based systematic uncertainties, and MC statistical uncertainties.

The observed $\Delta\mathrm{NLL}$ curves for each analysis channel as a function of $\tilde d$, compared to the combined result. For the individual analysis channel $\Delta\mathrm{NLL}$ curves, only event yield information in the other SRs is used, ensuring that the Optimal Observable distributions in the other SRs do not influence the preferred value of $\tilde d$. The signal strength is constrained to be positive in these individual channel $\Delta\mathrm{NLL}$ curves. The exact value of the $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ cut on the leading lepton depends on the trigger.

Post-fit BDT distributions in the top-quark CR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}$ SF channel. The size of the combined statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties is given. The exact value of the $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ cut on the leptons depends on the trigger.

Post-fit BDT distributions in the top-quark CR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}$ DF channel. The size of the combined statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties is given.

Post-fit BDT distributions in the $Z\to \ell\ell$ CR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}$ SF analysis channel. The size of the combined statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties is given. The exact value of the $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ cut on the leptons depends on the trigger.

Post-fit Optimal Observable distributions in the top-quark CR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}$ SF channel. The size of the combined statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties is given. The exact value of the $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ cut on the leptons depends on the trigger.

Post-fit Optimal Observable distributions in the top-quark CR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}$ DF channel. The size of the combined statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties is given.

Post-fit Optimal Observable distributions in the $Z\to \ell\ell$ CR for the $\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}\tau_{\mathrm{lep}}$ SF analysis channel. The size of the combined statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties is given. The exact value of the $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ cut on the leptons depends on the trigger.

Post-fit distribution of weighted event yields as a function of the Optimal Observable for all four SRs combined. The contributions of the different SRs are weighted by a factor of ln(1 + S/B), where S and B are the post-fit expected numbers of signal and background events in that region, respectively. The size of the combined statistical, experimental, and theoretical uncertainties is given.

Event yields for a simulated $ZH(\rightarrow aa\rightarrow (b\bar{b})(b\bar{b}))$ sample with $m_a = 17.5\,\text{GeV}$. The signal sample is produced with cross section equals to the standard model $pp\to ZH$, i.e. $0.88\,\text{pb}$. Cut 0 corresponds to the initial number of events. Cut 1 requires the single lepton trigger. Cut 2 requires 2 identified leptons. Cut 3 requires the Z-boson mass window. Cut 4 requires 2 reconstructed $a\to b\bar{b}$ candidates. Cut 5a requires 2 identified $a\to b\bar{b}$ candidates in the 1HPC1LPC region. Cut 6a requires the 2 $a\to b\bar{b}$ candidates in the 1HPC1LPC region to be inside the Higgs mass window. Cut 5b requires 2 identified $a\to b\bar{b}$ candidates in the 2HPC region. Cut 6b requires the 2 $a\to b\bar{b}$ candidates in the 2HPC region to be inside the Higgs mass window.

Background yield table for Z+jets, $t\bar{t}$, and rare sources. Observed data yield. Signal $ZH(\rightarrow aa\rightarrow (b\bar{b})(b\bar{b}))$ yield with $m_a = 20\,\text{GeV}$. The signal sample is produced with cross section equals to the standard model $pp\to ZH$, i.e. $0.88\,\text{pb}$, with a branching ratio set to 1 for the $H \rightarrow aa$ decay, whereas the ATLAS figure attached to this entry instead uses the upper-limit branching ratio (smaller than 1). The table includes the yields in two signal regions with leptons consistent with an on-shell Z-boson decay, one with 2 $a\to b\bar{b}$ candidates in the 2HPC region and one with 2 $a\to b\bar{b}$ candidates in the 1HPC1LPC region. The table also includes the yields in four control regions, one with leptons consistent with an on-shell Z-boson decay and 2 $a\to b\bar{b}$ candidates in the Low Purity Category (LPC), and three others where the leptons are not consistent an on-shell Z-boson decay.

Correlation matrix between the fiducial cross sections for the four individual decay final states and the $ZZ^{*}$ normalisation factor.

Differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum $p_{T}^{4l}$ of the Higgs boson. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 . Measured value in the last bin is un upper limit at 95% CL.

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum $p_{T}^{4l}$ of the Higgs boson.

Differential fiducial cross section for the invariant mass $m_{12}$ of the leading Z boson. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the invariant mass $m_{12}$ of the leading Z boson.

Differential fiducial cross section for the invariant mass $m_{34}$ of the subleading Z boson. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the invariant mass $m_{34}$ of the subleading Z boson.

Differential fiducial cross section for the rapidity $|y_{4l}|$ of the Higgs boson. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the rapidity $|y_{4l}|$ of the Higgs boson.

Differential fiducial cross section for the production angle $|\cos\theta^{*}|$ of the leading Z boson. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the production angle $|\cos\theta^{*}|$ of the leading Z boson.

Differential fiducial cross section for the production angle $\cos\theta_{1}$ of the anti-lepton from the leading Z boson. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the production angle $\cos\theta_{1}$ of the anti-lepton from the leading Z boson.

Differential fiducial cross section for the production angle $\cos\theta_{2}$ of the anti-lepton from the subleading Z boson. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the production angle $\cos\theta_{2}$ of the anti-lepton from the subleading Z boson.

Differential fiducial cross section for the azimuthal angle $\phi$ of the decay planes of the two reconstructed Z bosons. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the azimuthal angle $\phi$ of the decay planes of the two reconstructed Z bosons.

Differential fiducial cross section for the azimuthal angle $\phi_{1}$ of the decay plane of the leading Z boson and the plane formed between its four-momentum and the z-axis. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the azimuthal angle $\phi_{1}$ of the decay plane of the leading Z boson and the plane formed between its four-momentum and the z-axis.

Differential fiducial cross section for the jet multiplicity $N_{jets}$. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the jet multiplicity $N_{jets}$.

Differential fiducial cross section for the inclusive jet multiplicity $N_{jets}$. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Differential fiducial cross section for the number of b-quark initiated jets $N_{b-jets}$. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the number of b-quark initiated jets $N_{b-jets}$.

Differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum of the leading jet $p_{T}^{lead.jet}$ in events with at least one jet. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum of the leading jet $p_{T}^{lead.jet}$ in events with at least one jet.

Differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum of the subleading jet $p_{T}^{sublead.jet}$ in events with at least two jets. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum of the subleading jet $p_{T}^{sublead.jet}$ in events with at least two jets.

Differential fiducial cross section for the invariant mass of the two highest-pT jets $m_{jj}$ in events with at least two jets. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the invariant mass of the two highest-pT jets $m_{jj}$ in events with at least two jets.

Differential fiducial cross section for the distance between the two highest-pT jets in pseudorapidity $\Delta\eta_{jj}$. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the distance between the two highest-pT jets in pseudorapidity $\Delta\eta_{jj}$.

Differential fiducial cross section for the distance between the two highest-pT jets in $\phi$ $\Delta\phi_{jj}$. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the distance between the two highest-pT jets in $\phi$ $\Delta\phi_{jj}$.

Differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum of the four lepton plus jet system, in events with at least one jet $p_{T}^{4lj}$. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum of the four lepton plus jet system, in events with at least one jet $p_{T}^{4lj}$.

Differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum of the four lepton plus di-jet system, in events with at least two jets $p_{T}^{4ljj}$. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 . Measured value in the last bin is un upper limit at 95% CL.

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum of the four lepton plus di-jet system, in events with at least two jets $p_{T}^{4ljj}$.

Differential fiducial cross section for the invariant mass of the four lepton plus jet system in events with at least one jet $m_{4lj}$. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the invariant mass of the four lepton plus jet system in events with at least one jet $m_{4lj}$.

Differential fiducial cross section for the invariant mass of the four lepton plus di-jet system in events with at least two jets $m_{4ljj}$. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the invariant mass of the four lepton plus di-jet system in events with at least two jets $m_{4ljj}$.

Differential fiducial cross section for the leading vs. subleading Z boson mass $m_{12}$vs.$m_{34}$. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the leading vs. subleading Z boson mass $m_{12}$vs.$m_{34}$.

Differential fiducial cross section for the leading vs. subleading Z boson mass $m_{12}$vs.$m_{34}$ in $ll\mu\mu$ final states. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Differential fiducial cross section for the leading vs. subleading Z boson mass $m_{12}$vs.$m_{34}$ in $llee$ final states. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the leading vs. subleading Z boson mass m12 vs. m34 in $ll\mu\mu$ and $llee$ final states.

Differential fiducial cross section of the $p_{T}^{4l}$ distribution in $|y_{4l}|$ bins. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section of the $p_{T}^{4l}$ distribution in $|y_{4l}|$ bins.

Differential fiducial cross section of the $p_{T}^{4l}$ distribution in $N_{jets}$ bins. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section of the $p_{T}^{4l}$ distribution in $N_{jets}$ bins.

Differential fiducial cross section for transverse momentum of the four lepton system vs. the transverse momentum of the four lepton plus jet system $p_{T}^{4l}$vs.$p_{T}^{4lj}$. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for transverse momentum of the four lepton system vs. the transverse momentum of the four lepton plus jet system $p_{T}^{4l}$vs.$p_{T}^{4lj}$.

Differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum of the four lepton plus jet system vs the invariant mass of the four lepton plus jet system $p_{T}^{4l}$vs.$m_{4lj}$. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum of the four lepton plus jet system vs the invariant mass of the four lepton plus jet system $p_{T}^{4l}$vs.$m_{4lj}$.

Differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum of the four lepton vs the transverse momentum of the leading jet $p_{T}^{4l}$vs.$p_{T}^{l.jet}$. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum of the four lepton vs the transverse momentum of the leading jet $p_{T}^{4l}$vs.$p_{T}^{lead.jet}$.

Differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum of the leading jet vs the rapidity of the leading jet $p_{T}^{lead.jet}$vs.$|y^{lead.jet}|$. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum of the leading jet vs the rapidity of the leading jet $p_{T}^{lead.jet}$vs.$|y^{lead.jet}|$.

Differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum of the leading jet vs the transverse momentum of the subleading jet $p_{T}^{lead.jet}$vs.$p_{T}^{sublead.jet}$. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the transverse momentum of the leading jet vs the transverse momentum of the subleading jet $p_{T}^{lead.jet}$vs.$p_{T}^{sublead.jet}$.

Differential fiducial cross section for the leading Z boson mass $m_{12}$ in $4\mu$ and $4e$ final states. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Differential fiducial cross section for the leading Z boson mass $m_{12}$ in $2e2\mu$ and $2\mu2e$ final states. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the leading Z boson mass $m_{12}$ in $4l$ and $2l2l$ final states.

Differential fiducial cross section for the subleading Z boson mass $m_{34}$ in $4\mu$ and $4e$ final states. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Differential fiducial cross section for the subleading Z boson mass $m_{34}$ in $2e2\mu$ and $2\mu2e$ final states. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the subleading Z boson mass $m_{34}$ in $4l$ and $2l2l$ final states.

Differential fiducial cross section for the azimuthal angle $\phi$ of the decay planes of the two reconstructed Z bosons in $4\mu$ and $4e$ final states. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Differential fiducial cross section for the azimuthal angle $\phi$ of the decay planes of the two reconstructed Z bosons in $2e2\mu$ and $2\mu2e$ final states. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the azimuthal angle $\phi$ of the decay planes of the two reconstructed Z bosons in $4l$ and $2l2l$ final states.

Differential fiducial cross section for the leading vs. subleading Z boson mass $m_{12}$vs.$m_{34}$ in $4\mu$ and $4e$ final states. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Differential fiducial cross section for the leading vs. subleading Z boson mass $m_{12}$vs.$m_{34}$ in $2\mu2e$ and $2e2\mu$ final states. The measured cross sections are compared to predictions provided by NNLOPS + XH. NNLOPS is normalised to the N3LO total cross section with a K-factor = 1.1 .

Correlation matrix between the measured cross sections and the $ZZ^{*}$ background normalization corresponding to the differential fiducial cross section for the leading vs. subleading Z boson mass $m_{12}$vs.$m_{34}$ in $4l$ and $2l2l$ final states.

The expected (pre-fit) and observed numbers of events for an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV in the signal region 115 < $m_{4l}$< 130 GeV and sideband region $m_{4l}$ in 105-115 GeV or 130-160 GeV (350 GeV for $tXX$-enriched) in each reconstructed event category assuming the SM Higgs boson signal with a mass $m_{H}$= 125 GeV. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are included for the predictions. Expected contributions that are below 0.2% of the total yield in each reconstructed event category are not shown and replaced by -.

The expected and the observed (post-fit) the jet multiplicity distribution after the inclusive event selection for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed (post-fit) the four-lepton transverse momentum distribution for events with zero jets, after the inclusive event selection for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed (post-fit) the four-lepton transverse momentum distribution for events with one jet, after the inclusive event selection for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed (post-fit) the four-lepton transverse momentum distribution for events with at least two jets, after the inclusive event selection for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed (post-fit) the dijet invariant mass distribution for events with at least two jets, after the inclusive event selection for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed $NN_{ggF}$ output (post-fit) distribution in 0$j$-$p_{T}^{4l}$-Low category for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed $NN_{ggF}$ output (post-fit) distribution in 0$j$-$p_{T}^{4l}$-Med category for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed $NN_{VBF}$ output (post-fit) distribution in 1$j$-$p_{T}^{4l}$-Low category with $NN_{ZZ}$<0.25 for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed $NN_{ZZ}$ output (post-fit) distribution in 1$j$-$p_{T}^{4l}$-Low category with $NN_{ZZ}$>0.25 for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed $NN_{VBF}$ output (post-fit) distribution in 1$j$-$p_{T}^{4l}$-Med category with $NN_{ZZ}$<0.25 for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed $NN_{ZZ}$ output (post-fit) distribution in 1$j$-$p_{T}^{4l}$-Med category with $NN_{ZZ}$>0.25 for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed $NN_{VBF}$ output (post-fit) distribution in 1$j$-$p_{T}^{4l}$-High category for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed $NN_{VBF}$ output (post-fit) distribution in 2$j$ category with $NN_{VH}$<0.2 for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed $NN_{VH}$ output (post-fit) distribution in 2$j$ category with $NN_{VH}$>0.2 for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed $NN_{VBF}$ output (post-fit) distribution in 2$j$-BSM-like category for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed $NN_{ttH}$ output (post-fit) distribution in $ttH$-Had-enriched category with $NN_{tXX}$<0.4 for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed $NN_{tXX}$ output (post-fit) distribution in $ttH$-Had-enriched category with $NN_{tXX}$>0.4 for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed $NN_{ttH}$ output (post-fit) distribution in $VH$-Lep-enriched category for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed events in the categories where no NN discriminant is used for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected and the observed events in the side bands used to constraint the $ZZ^{*}$ and $tXX$ backgrounds for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13TeV. The SM Higgs boson signal is assumed to have a mass $m_{H}$=125 GeV.

The expected SM cross section $(\sigma \cdot BR)_{SM}$, the observed value of $(\sigma \cdot BR)$, and their ratio $(\sigma \cdot BR)/(\sigma \cdot BR)_{SM}$ for the inclusive production and for each Production Mode and Reduced Stage-1.1 production bin for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV.

The correlation matrices between the measured cross-sections and the $ZZ$ and $tXX$ normalisation factors for Production Mode Stage.

The correlation matrices between the measured cross-sections and the $ZZ$ and $tXX$ normalisation factors for Reduced Stage 1.1.

Likelihood contours at 68% CLs in the (ggF,VBF) plane. The observed best fit value is the first value of the table.

Likelihood contours at 95% CLs in the (ggF,VBF) plane. The observed best fit value is the first value of the table.

Likelihood contours at 68% CLs in the (ggF,VH) plane. The observed best fit value is the first value of the table.

Likelihood contours at 95% CLs in the (ggF,VH) plane. The observed best fit value is the first value of the table.

Likelihood contours at 68% CLs in the (VBF,VH) plane. The observed best fit value is the first value of the table.

Likelihood contours at 95% CLs in the (VBF,VH) plane. The observed best fit value is the first value of the table.

Likelihood contours at 68% CLs in the ($gg2H-0j-p_T^H-Low$,$gg2H-0j-p_T^H-High$) plane. The observed best fit value is the first value of the table.

Likelihood contours at 95% CLs in the ($gg2H-0j-p_T^H-Low$,$gg2H-0j-p_T^H-High$) plane. The observed best fit value is the first value of the table.

Likelihood contours at 68% CLs in the ($\kappa_{V}$vs.$\kappa_{F}$) plane. The observed best fit value is the first value of the table.

Likelihood contours at 95% CLs in the ($\kappa_{V}$vs.$\kappa_{F}$) plane. The observed best fit value is the first value of the table.

The expected signal yield ratio for chosen CP-even and CP-odd EFT parameter values together with the corresponding cross-section measurement in each production bin of Reduced Stage 1.1. The parameter values correspond approximately to the expected confidence intervals at the 68% CLs obtained from the statistical interpretation of data.

The expected and observed confidence intervals at 68% and 95% CLs of the SMEFT Wilson coefficients for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. For the coupling with two best fit values, the two values have been splitted in the two different columns 'Two Best-fit value - first' and 'Two Best-fit value - second', and the symbol '-' has been inserted in the missing fields.

Expected 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{HW}$ versus $c_{HB}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Observed 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{HW}$ versus $c_{HB}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Expected 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{HB}$ versus $c_{HG}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Observed 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{HB}$ versus $c_{HG}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Expected 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{uH}$ versus $c_{HG}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Observed 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{uH}$ versus $c_{HG}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

The best-fit values and the corresponding deviation from the SM prediction obtained from two-dimensional likelihood scans of the CP-odd BSM coupling parameters with 139fb$^{-1}$ data at $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. For the coupling with two best fit values, the two values have been splitted in the two different columns 'Two Observed best-fit first/second_POI - first' and 'Two Observed best-fit first/second_POI - second', and the symbol '-' has been inserted in the missing fields.

Expected 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{H\tilde{W}}$ versus $c_{H\tilde{B}}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Observed 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{H\tilde{W}}$ versus $c_{H\tilde{B}}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Expected 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{H\tilde{B}}$ versus $c_{H\tilde{G}}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Observed 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{H\tilde{B}}$ versus $c_{H\tilde{G}}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Expected 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{\tilde{u}H}$ versus $c_{H\tilde{G}}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Observed 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{\tilde{u}H}$ versus $c_{H\tilde{G}}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Signal acceptance times efficiency, expressed as a percentage, obtained from the ratio of the number of simulated signal events satisfying the event selection criteria in each reconstructed category to the total number of events generated in the phase space specified by a given Production model bin.

Signal acceptance times efficiency, expressed as a percentage, obtained from the ratio of the number of simulated signal events satisfying the event selection criteria in each reconstructed category to the total number of events generated in the phase space specified by a given Reduced Stage-1.1 production bin.

Observed covariance matrix for the different parameters of interest when fitting the for Production Mode Stage.

Observed covariance matrix for the different parameters of interest when fitting the for Reduced Stage 1.1.

The expected SM cross section $(\sigma\cdot BR)_{SM}$, the observed value of $(\sigma\cdot BR)$, and their ratio $(\sigma\cdot BR)/(\sigma\cdot BR)_{SM}$ for the alternate Reduced Stage-1.1 scheme for an integrated luminosity of 139fb$^{-1}$ at $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV.

The correlation matrices between the measured cross-sections and the ZZ and $tXX$ normalisation factors for alternative Reduced Stage 1.1.

Expected 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{HW}$ versus $c_{HWB}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Observed 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{HW}$ versus $c_{HWB}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Expected 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{HB}$ versus $c_{HWB}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Observed 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{HB}$ versus $c_{HWB}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Expected 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{HW}$ versus $c_{HG}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Observed 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{HW}$ versus $c_{HG}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Expected 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{HWB}$ versus $c_{HG}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Observed 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{HWB}$ versus $c_{HG}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Expected 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{H\tilde{W}}$ versus $c_{H\tilde{W}B}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Observed 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{H\tilde{W}}$ versus $c_{H\tilde{W}B}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Expected 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{H\tilde{B}}$ versus $c_{H\tilde{W}B}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Observed 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{H\tilde{B}}$ versus $c_{H\tilde{W}B}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Expected 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{H\tilde{W}}$ versus $c_{H\tilde{G}}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Observed 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{H\tilde{W}}$ versus $c_{H\tilde{G}}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Expected 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{H\tilde{W}B}$ versus $c_{H\tilde{G}}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Observed 2D-fit likelihood curves at the 95% CLs for the $c_{H\tilde{W}B}$ versus $c_{H\tilde{G}}$ coupling parameters at an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ and $\sqrt{s}$=13 TeV. Except for the two fitted Wilson coefficients, all others are set to zero.

Distribution of $v_{3}$ from MBT events plotted as a function of the A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ for 0-5% centrality.

Distribution of $v_{3}$ from $p_{T}^{jet}>75$ GeV events plotted as a function of the A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ for 0-5% centrality.

Distribution of $v_{3}$ from $p_{T}^{jet}>100$ GeV events plotted as a function of the A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ for 0-5% centrality.

Distribution of $v_{2}$ from MBT events plotted as a function of the event centrality and A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (0.5-2 GeV).

Distribution of $v_{2}$ from $p_{T}^{jet}>75$ GeV events plotted as a function of the event centrality and A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (0.5-2 GeV).

Distribution of $v_{2}$ from $p_{T}^{jet}>100$ GeV events plotted as a function of the event centrality and A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (0.5-2 GeV).

Distribution of $v_{2}$ from MBT events plotted as a function of the event centrality and A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (2-9 GeV).

Distribution of $v_{2}$ from $p_{T}^{jet}>75$ GeV events plotted as a function of the event centrality and A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (2-9 GeV).

Distribution of $v_{2}$ from $p_{T}^{jet}>100$ GeV events plotted as a function of the event centrality and A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (2-9 GeV).

Distribution of $v_{2}$ from MBT events plotted as a function of the event centrality and A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (9-100 GeV).

Distribution of $v_{2}$ from $p_{T}^{jet}>75$ GeV events plotted as a function of the event centrality and A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (9-100 GeV).

Distribution of $v_{2}$ from $p_{T}^{jet}>100$ GeV events plotted as a function of the event centrality and A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (9-100 GeV).

Distribution of relative UE-UE pair fractions from MBT events plotted as a function of A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ for 0-5% centrality.

Distribution of relative HS-HS pair fractions from MBT events plotted as a function of A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ for 0-5% centrality.

Distribution of relative HS-UE pair fractions from MBT events plotted as a function of A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ for 0-5% centrality.

Distribution of relative UE-HS pair fractions from MBT events plotted as a function of A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ for 0-5% centrality.

Distribution of relative UE-UE pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>75$ GeV events plotted as a function of A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ for 0-5% centrality.

Distribution of relative HS-HS pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>75$ GeV events plotted as a function of A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ for 0-5% centrality.

Distribution of relative HS-UE pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>75$ GeV events plotted as a function of A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ for 0-5% centrality.

Distribution of relative UE-HS pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>75$ GeV events plotted as a function of A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ for 0-5% centrality.

Distribution of relative UE-UE pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>100$ GeV events plotted as a function of A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ for 0-5% centrality.

Distribution of relative HS-HS pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>100$ GeV events plotted as a function of A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ for 0-5% centrality.

Distribution of relative HS-UE pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>100$ GeV events plotted as a function of A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ for 0-5% centrality.

Distribution of relative UE-HS pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>100$ GeV events plotted as a function of A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ for 0-5% centrality.

Distribution of relative UE-UE pair fractions from MBT events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (0.5-2 GeV).

Distribution of relative HS-UE pair fractions from MBT events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (0.5-2 GeV).

Distribution of relative UE-UE pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>75$ GeV events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (0.5-2 GeV).

Distribution of relative HS-UE pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>75$ GeV events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (0.5-2 GeV).

Distribution of relative UE-UE pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>100$ GeV events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (0.5-2 GeV).

Distribution of relative HS-UE pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>100$ GeV events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (0.5-2 GeV).

Distribution of relative UE-UE pair fractions from MBT events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (2-9 GeV).

Distribution of relative HS-UE pair fractions from MBT events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (2-9 GeV).

Distribution of relative UE-UE pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>75$ GeV events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (2-9 GeV).

Distribution of relative HS-UE pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>75$ GeV events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (2-9 GeV).

Distribution of relative UE-UE pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>100$ GeV events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (2-9 GeV).

Distribution of relative HS-UE pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>100$ GeV events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (2-9 GeV).

Distribution of relative UE-UE pair fractions from MBT events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (9-100 GeV).

Distribution of relative HS-UE pair fractions from MBT events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (9-100 GeV).

Distribution of relative UE-UE pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>75$ GeV events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (9-100 GeV).

Distribution of relative HS-UE pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>75$ GeV events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (9-100 GeV).

Distribution of relative UE-UE pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>100$ GeV events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (9-100 GeV).

Distribution of relative HS-UE pair fractions from $p_{T}^{jet}>100$ GeV events plotted as a function of centrality A-particle $p_\mathrm{T}$ in (9-100 GeV).

The post-fit $m_{CT}$ distribution is shown in the validation region VR-offLM after all the selection requirements are applied other than the $m_{CT}$ cut. The stacked histograms show the expected SM backgrounds. The hatched bands represent the sum in quadrature of systematic and statistical uncertainties of the total SM background. The red line with arrow indicates the $m_{CT}$ cut used in SR selection. The first and the last bin include the underflow and overflow events (where present), respectively.

The post-fit $m_{CT}$ distribution is shown in the validation region VR-offMM after all the selection requirements are applied other than the $m_{CT}$ cut. The stacked histograms show the expected SM backgrounds. The hatched bands represent the sum in quadrature of systematic and statistical uncertainties of the total SM background. The red line with arrow indicates the $m_{CT}$ cut used in SR selection. The first and the last bin include the underflow and overflow events (where present), respectively.

The post-fit $m_{CT}$ distribution is shown in the validation region VR-offHM after all the selection requirements are applied other than the $m_{CT}$ cut. The stacked histograms show the expected SM backgrounds. The hatched bands represent the sum in quadrature of systematic and statistical uncertainties of the total SM background. The red line with arrow indicates the $m_{CT}$ cut used in SR selection. The first and the last bin include the underflow and overflow events (where present), respectively.

The post-fit $m_{CT}$ distribution for SR-HM. The stacked histograms show the expected SM backgrounds. The hatched bands represent the sum in quadrature of systematic and statistical uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distribution of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The overflow events, where present, are included in the last bin.

The post-fit $m_{CT}$ distribution for SR-MM. The stacked histograms show the expected SM backgrounds. The hatched bands represent the sum in quadrature of systematic and statistical uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distribution of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The overflow events, where present, are included in the last bin.

The post-fit $m_{CT}$ distribution for SR-LM. The stacked histograms show the expected SM backgrounds. The hatched bands represent the sum in quadrature of systematic and statistical uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distribution of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The overflow events, where present, are included in the last bin.

The post-fit $m_{bb}$ distribution is shown in the signal region SR-HM after all the selection requirements are applied other than the $m_{bb}$ cut. The stacked histograms show the expected SM backgrounds. The hatched bands represent the sum in quadrature of systematic and statistical uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distribution of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The red line with arrow indicates the $m_{bb}$ cut used in SR selection.The overflow events, where present, are included in the last bin.

The post-fit $m_{bb}$ distribution is shown in the signal region SR-MM after all the selection requirements are applied other than the $m_{bb}$ cut. The hatched bands represent the sum in quadrature of systematic and statistical uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distribution of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The red line with arrow indicates the $m_{bb}$ cut used in SR selection. The overflow events, where present, are included in the last bin.

The post-fit $m_{bb}$ distribution is shown in the signal region SR-LM after all the selection requirements are applied other than the $m_{bb}$ cut. The hatched bands represent the sum in quadrature of systematic and statistical uncertainties of the total SM background. For illustration, the distribution of the SUSY reference points are also shown as dashed lines. The red line with arrow indicates the $m_{bb}$ cut used in SR selection. The overflow events, where present, are included in the last bin.

The observed exclusion for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production. Experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are applied to background and signal samples and illustrated by the yellow band and the red dotted contour lines, respectively. The red dotted lines indicate the $\pm$ 1 standard-deviation variation on the observed exclusion limit due to theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

The observed exclusion up limit for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production. The red dotted lines indicate the $\pm 1 \sigma$ on the observed exclusion limit due to the theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

The observed exclusion down limit for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production. The red dotted lines indicate the $\pm 1 \sigma$ on the observed exclusion limit due to the theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

The expected exclusion for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production. Experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are applied to background and signal samples and illustrated by the yellow band and the red dotted contour lines, respectively. The red dotted lines indicate the $\pm$ 1 standard-deviation variation on the observed exclusion limit due to theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

Upper limits on the cross sections for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal acceptance in SR-LM for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal acceptance in SR-LM low $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal acceptance in SR-LM med. $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal acceptance in SR-LM high $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal acceptance in SR-MM for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal acceptance in SR-MM low $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal acceptance in SR-MM med. $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal acceptance in SR-MM high $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal acceptance in SR-HM for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production. 1lb\bar{b}$ production

Signal acceptance in SR-HM low $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal acceptance in SR-HM med. $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal acceptance in SR-HM high $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal efficiency in SR-LM for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal efficiency in SR-LM low $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal efficiency in SR-LM med. $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal efficiency in SR-LM high $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal efficiency in SR-MM for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal efficiency in SR-MM low $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal efficiency in SR-MM med. $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal efficiency in SR-MM high $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal efficiency in SR-HM for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal efficiency in SR-HM low $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal efficiency in SR-HM med. $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Signal efficiency in SR-HM high $m_{CT}$ for simplified models with $\tilde\chi^\pm_1 \tilde\chi^0_2 \rightarrow Wh\tilde\chi^0_1\tilde\chi^0_1, W \rightarrow l\nu, h \rightarrow b\bar{b}$ production.

Event selection cutflow for a representative signal sample for the SR-LM low $m_{CT}$. The masses of next-lightest-neutralinos and LSPs are reported. While the first row of the table reports the total raw MC events produced, all subsequent rows show weighted events. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. Samples are produced with generator filters which selects $h\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ and $W\rightarrow\ell\nu$ decays.

Event selection cutflow for a representative signal sample for the SR-LM med. $m_{CT}$. The masses of next-lightest-neutralinos and LSPs are reported. While the first row of the table reports the total raw MC events produced, all subsequent rows show weighted events. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. Samples are produced with generator filters which selects $h\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ and $W\rightarrow\ell\nu$ decays.

Event selection cutflow for a representative signal sample for the SR-LM high $m_{CT}$. The masses of next-lightest-neutralinos and LSPs are reported. While the first row of the table reports the total raw MC events produced, all subsequent rows show weighted events. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. Samples are produced with generator filters which selects $h\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ and $W\rightarrow\ell\nu$ decays.

Event selection cutflow for a representative signal sample for the SR-MM low $m_{CT}$. The masses of next-lightest-neutralinos and LSPs are reported. While the first row of the table reports the total raw MC events produced, all subsequent rows show weighted events. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. Samples are produced with generator filters which selects $h\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ and $W\rightarrow\ell\nu$ decays.

Event selection cutflow for a representative signal sample for the SR-MM med. $m_{CT}$. The masses of next-lightest-neutralinos and LSPs are reported. While the first row of the table reports the total raw MC events produced, all subsequent rows show weighted events. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. Samples are produced with generator filters which selects $h\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ and $W\rightarrow\ell\nu$ decays.

Event selection cutflow for a representative signal sample for the SR-MM high $m_{CT}$. The masses of next-lightest-neutralinos and LSPs are reported. While the first row of the table reports the total raw MC events produced, all subsequent rows show weighted events. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. Samples are produced with generator filters which selects $h\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ and $W\rightarrow\ell\nu$ decays.

Event selection cutflow for a representative signal sample for the SR-HM low $m_{CT}$. The masses of next-lightest-neutralinos and LSPs are reported. While the first row of the table reports the total raw MC events produced, all subsequent rows show weighted events. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. Samples are produced with generator filters which selects $h\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ and $W\rightarrow\ell\nu$ decays.

Event selection cutflow for a representative signal sample for the SR-HM med. $m_{CT}$. The masses of next-lightest-neutralinos and LSPs are reported. While the first row of the table reports the total raw MC events produced, all subsequent rows show weighted events. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. Samples are produced with generator filters which selects $h\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ and $W\rightarrow\ell\nu$ decays.

Event selection cutflow for a representative signal sample for the SR-HM high $m_{CT}$. The masses of next-lightest-neutralinos and LSPs are reported. While the first row of the table reports the total raw MC events produced, all subsequent rows show weighted events. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. Samples are produced with generator filters which selects $h\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ and $W\rightarrow\ell\nu$ decays.

Event selection cutflow for a representative signal sample for the discovery SR-LM. The masses of next-lightest-neutralinos and LSPs are reported. While the first row of the table reports the total raw MC events produced, all subsequent rows show weighted events. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. Samples are produced with generator filters which selects $h\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ and $W\rightarrow\ell\nu$ decays.

Event selection cutflow for a representative signal sample for the discovery SR-MM. The masses of next-lightest-neutralinos and LSPs are reported. While the first row of the table reports the total raw MC events produced, all subsequent rows show weighted events. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. Samples are produced with generator filters which selects $h\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ and $W\rightarrow\ell\nu$ decays.

Event selection cutflow for a representative signal sample for the discovery SR-HM. The masses of next-lightest-neutralinos and LSPs are reported. While the first row of the table reports the total raw MC events produced, all subsequent rows show weighted events. Only statistical uncertainties are shown. Samples are produced with generator filters which selects $h\rightarrow b\bar{b}$ and $W\rightarrow\ell\nu$ decays.

Observed and predicted mTtot distribution in the b-tag category of the 2tau_h channel. Please note that the bin content is divided by the bin width in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table. The last bin includes overflows. The combined prediction for A and H bosons with masses of 400, 1000 and 1500 GeV and $\tan\beta$ = 6, 12 and 25 respectively in the mh125 scenario are also provided. The combined prediction for A and H bosons with masses of 1000 and 1500 GeV is scaled by 100 in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the gluon-gluon fusion Higgs boson production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the Higgs boson mass.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the b-associated Higgs boson production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the boson mass.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered for the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60.

The expected 95% CL upper limits on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered for the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered for the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered for the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered for the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered for the $M_{h}^{125}$ scenario is 0.5. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60.

The expected 95% CL upper limits on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus one sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with plus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60.

The expected 95% CL upper limits with minus two sigma on $\tan\beta$ as a function of $m_{A}$ in the hMSSM scenario. The lowest value of $\tan\beta$ considered by the hMSSM scenario is 0.8 and the highest value of mass is 2 TeV. The points in the region which is called "Not applicable" in the paper figure are kept in the HEPData table. Linear connection is applied in the range of signal mass points from 400 to 1000 GeV in the paper figure. The range of $\tan\beta$ shown in the paper figure and the HEPData is from 1 to 60.

Acceptance times efficiency for a scalar boson produced by gluon-gluon fusion as a function of the scalar boson mass.

Acceptance times efficiency for a scalar boson produced by b-associated production as a function of the scalar boson mass.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the scalar boson production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the scalar boson mass and the fraction of the b-associated production. The limits are calculated from a statistical combination of the 1l1tau_h and 2tau_h channels.

Expected 95% CL upper limits on the scalar boson production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the scalar boson mass and the fraction of the b-associated production. The limits are calculated from a statistical combination of the 1l1tau_h and 2tau_h channels.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 200 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 250 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 300 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 350 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 400 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 500 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 600 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 700 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 800 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 1000 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 1200 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 1500 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 2000 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 2500 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 200 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 250 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 300 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 350 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 400 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 500 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 600 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 700 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 800 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 1000 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 1200 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 1500 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 2000 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times branching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the scalar boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively. The value of $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ for 2500 GeV signal mass point is shown in the HEPData table.

Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on $\sigma(pp\to H)B(H\to Z(\eta_c~\text{or}~J/\psi))/$pb. The smaller (larger) quoted ranges around the expected limits represent $\pm 1\sigma$ ($\pm 2\sigma$) fluctuations.

Selection acceptance times efficiency for the 1 lepton signal events from MC simulations as a function of the resonance mass for VBF production.

Selection acceptance times efficiency for the 2 leptons signal events from MC simulations as a function of the resonance mass for ggF/DY production.

Selection acceptance times efficiency for the 2 leptons signal events from MC simulations as a function of the resonance mass for VBF production.

The fractions of signal events passing the VBF requirement on the RNN score as functions of the resonance mass for both VBF and ggF production. Information on the RNN model, such as the architecture, network weights and features scaling files are provided as additional resources.

Upper 95% CLs limits on the ggF production cross section of Radions in their $WW+ZZ$ decays as a function of the resonance mass.

Upper 95% CLs limits on the VBF production cross section of Radions in their $WW+ZZ$ decays as a function of the resonance mass.

Upper 95% CLs limits on the DY production cross section of HVT $W'$ in their $WZ$ decays as a function of the resonance mass.

Upper 95% CLs limits on the VBF production cross section of HVT $W'$ in their $WZ$ decays as a function of the resonance mass.

Upper 95% CLs limits on the DY production cross section of HVT $Z'$ in their $WW$ decays as a function of the resonance mass.

Upper 95% CLs limits on the VBF production cross section of HVT $Z'$ in their $WW$ decays as a function of the resonance mass.

Upper 95% CLs limits on the ggF production cross section of Gravitons in their $WW+ZZ$ decays as a function of the resonance mass.

Upper 95% CLs limits on the VBF production cross section of Gravitons in their $WW+ZZ$ decays as a function of the resonance mass.

Upper 95% CLs limits on the ggF production cross section of Radions in their $WW$ decays as a function of the resonance mass.

Upper 95% CLs limits on the VBF production cross section of Radions in their $WW$ decays as a function of the resonance mass.

Upper 95% CLs limits on the ggF production cross section of Radions in their $ZZ$ decays as a function of the resonance mass.

Upper 95% CLs limits on the VBF production cross section of Radions in their $ZZ$ decays as a function of the resonance mass.

Upper 95% CLs limits on the ggF production cross section of Gravitons in their $WW$ decays as a function of the resonance mass.

Upper 95% CLs limits on the VBF production cross section of Gravitons in their $WW$ decays as a function of the resonance mass.

Upper 95% CLs limits on the ggF production cross section of Gravitons in their $ZZ$ decays as a function of the resonance mass.

Upper 95% CLs limits on the VBF production cross section of Gravitons in their $ZZ$ decays as a function of the resonance mass.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contours in signal region Rpv2L on the gluino and lightest top squark masses in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay into a top quark and an top squark, which in turn decays via non-zero baryon-number-violating RPV couplings $\lambda^{''}_{313}$, $\tilde g\to t\tilde{t}_1$ followed by $\tilde{t}_1\to b d$.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contours in the best combination of signal regions of Rpc2L1b and Rpc2L2b on the lightest bottom squark and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where pairs of bottom-antibottom squarks are produced and decay into the lightest neutralino via a chargino, $\tilde b^{}_{1}\to t\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ followed by $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm\to W^\pm\tilde{\chi}_1^0$.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contours in the best combination of signal regions of Rpc2L1b and Rpc2L2b on the lightest bottom squark and lightest neutralino masses in a SUSY scenario where pairs of bottom-antibottom squarks are produced and decay into the lightest neutralino via a chargino, $\tilde b^{}_{1}\to t\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ followed by $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm\to W^\pm\tilde{\chi}_1^0$.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region Rpc2L0b, in a SUSY scenario where gluinos are produced in pairs and decay into the lightest neutralino via a two-steps cascade, $\tilde g\to q\bar{q}^{'}\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm$ followed by $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm\to W^\pm\tilde{\chi}_2^0$ and $\tilde{\chi}_2^0\to Z\tilde{\chi}_1^0$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde g)$ = 1600 GeV, $m(\tilde \chi_1^\pm)$ = 1200 GeV, $m(\tilde \chi_2^0)$ = 1000 GeV and $m(\tilde \chi_1^0)$ = 800 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region Rpc2L1b, in a SUSY scenario where pairs of bottom-antibottom squarks are produced and decay into the lightest neutralino via a chargino, $\tilde b^{}_{1}\to t\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ followed by $\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm\to W^\pm\tilde{\chi}_1^0$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{b}^{}_1)$ = 850 GeV, $m(\tilde \chi_1^\pm)$ = 500 GeV and $m(\tilde \chi_1^0)$ = 400 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.