Exitation as function as function of photon beam energy at cms $\Theta_\pi^0= 25 deg$

Exitation as function as function of photon beam energy at cms $\Theta_\pi^0= 35 deg$

Exitation as function as function of photon beam energy at cms $\Theta_\pi^0= 45 deg$

Exitation as function as function of photon beam energy at cms $\Theta_\pi^0= 55 deg$

Exitation as function as function of photon beam energy at cms $\Theta_\pi^0= 65 deg$

Exitation as function as function of photon beam energy at cms $\Theta_\pi^0= 75 deg$

Exitation as function as function of photon beam energy at cms $\Theta_\pi^0= 85 deg$

Exitation as function as function of photon beam energy at cms $\Theta_\pi^0= 95 deg$

Exitation as function as function of photon beam energy at cms $\Theta_\pi^0= 105 deg$

Exitation as function as function of photon beam energy at cms $\Theta_\pi^0= 115 deg$

Exitation as function as function of photon beam energy at cms $\Theta_\pi^0= 125 deg$

Exitation as function as function of photon beam energy at cms $\Theta_\pi^0= 135 deg$

Exitation as function as function of photon beam energy at cms $\Theta_\pi^0= 145 deg$

Exitation as function as function of photon beam energy at cms $\Theta_\pi^0= 155 deg$

Exitation as function as function of photon beam energy at cms $\Theta_\pi^0= 165 deg$

Exitation as function as function of photon beam energy at cms $\Theta_\pi^0= 175 deg$

Covariance for full matrix measurement all bins from $m(t\bar{t})$ fit

Results for full matrix measurement inclusive from $p_{T}(t)$

Covariance for full matrix measurement inclusive from $p_{T}(t)$

Results for full matrix measurement all bins from $p_{T}(t)$ fit

Covariance for full matrix measurement all bins from $p_{T}(t)$ fit

Results for full matrix measurement differential in $m(t\bar{t})$

Covariance for full matrix measurement differential in $m(t\bar{t})$

Results for full matrix measurement differential in $m(t\bar{t})$ for $|cos(\theta)| < 0.4$

Covariance for full matrix measurement differential in $m(t\bar{t})$ for $|cos(\theta)| < 0.4$

Results for full matrix measurement differential in $p_{T}(t)$

Covariance for full matrix measurement differential in $p_{T}(t)$

Results for $D$ measurement inclusive from $m(t\bar{t})$

Covariance for $D$ measurement inclusive from $m(t\bar{t})$

Results for $D$ measurement inclusive from $p_{T}(t)$

Covariance for $D$ measurement inclusive from $p_{T}(t)$

Results for $\tilde{D}$ measurement inclusive in $m(t\bar{t})$

Covariance for $\tilde{D}$ measurement inclusive in $m(t\bar{t})$

Results for $\tilde{D}$ measurement inclusive in $p_{T}(t)$

Covariance for $\tilde{D}$ measurement inclusive in $p_{T}(t)$

Results for $D$ measurement all bins from from $m(t\bar{t})$ fit

Covariance for $D$ measurement all bins from from $m(t\bar{t})$ fit

Results for $D$ measurement all bins from from $p_{T}(t)$ fit

Covariance for $D$ measurement all bins from from $p_{T}(t)$ fit

Results for $\tilde{D}$ measurement all bins from from $m(t\bar{t})$ fit

Covariance for $\tilde{D}$ measurement all bins from from $m(t\bar{t})$ fit

Results for $\tilde{D}$ measurement all bins from from $p_{T}(t)$ fit

Covariance for $\tilde{D}$ measurement all bins from from $p_{T}(t)$ fit

Results for $D$ measurement differential in $m(t\bar{t})$

Covariance for $D$ measurement differential in $m(t\bar{t})$

Results for $\tilde{D}$ measurement differential in $m(t\bar{t})$

Covariance for $\tilde{D}$ measurement differential in $m(t\bar{t})$

Results for $\tilde{D}$ measurement differential in $m(t\bar{t})$ for $|cos(\theta)| < 0.4$

Covariance for $\tilde{D}$ measurement differential in $m(t\bar{t})$ for $|cos(\theta)| < 0.4$

Results for $D$ measurement differential in $p_{T}(t)$

Covariance for $D$ measurement differential in $p_{T}(t)$

Results for $\tilde{D}$ measurement differential in $p_{T}(t)$

Covariance for $\tilde{D}$ measurement differential in $p_{T}(t)$

Expected and observed $95\%$ CL limits on the absolute value of the up-type quark coupling parameter $|\zeta_\mathrm{u}|$ for masses of the $A$ boson ranging from $20$ to $90\,\mathrm{GeV}$.

Observed $p_0$ values for the fits on the production cross-section for $gg\rightarrow A$ times the branching ratio for $A$ decaying into two $\tau$-leptons for $A$ boson masses from $20$ to $90\,\mathrm{GeV}$. For the fit on the up-type quark coupling parameter the $p_0$ values agree up to a precision of $O(10^{-5})$.

Rapidity Differential production cross sections of J/$\psi$ in the range 2 $\leq$ p$_{\rm T}$ < 4 GeV/c

Rapidity Differential production cross sections of J/$\psi$ in the range 4 $\leq$ p$_{\rm T}$ < 6 GeV/c

Rapidity Differential production cross sections of J/$\psi$ in the range 6 $\leq$ p$_{\rm T}$ < 12 GeV/c

Differential production cross sections of $\psi$(2S) as a function of $p_{\rm T}$.

Differential production cross sections of $\psi$(2S) as a function of rapidity.

$\psi$(2S) over J/$\psi$ ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$.

$\psi$(2S) over J/$\psi$ ratio as a function of rapidity.

Differential production cross sections of $\Upsilon(1S)$ as a function of $p_{\rm T}$.

Differential production cross sections of $\Upsilon(1S)$ as a function of rapidity.

J/$\psi$ 5-to-13 TeV cross section ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$.

J/$\psi$ 7-to-13 TeV cross section ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$.

J/$\psi$ 8-to-13 TeV cross section ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$.

J/$\psi$ 5-to-13 TeV cross section ratio as a function of rapidity.

J/$\psi$ 7-to-13 TeV cross section ratio as a function of rapidity.

J/$\psi$ 8-to-13 TeV cross section ratio as a function of rapidity.

$\psi$(2S) 5-to-13 TeV cross section ratio as a function of rapidity.

$\psi$(2S) 7-to-13 TeV cross section ratio as a function of rapidity.

$\psi$(2S) 8-to-13 TeV cross section ratio as a function of rapidity.

$\psi$(2S) 5-to-13 TeV cross section ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$.

$\psi$(2S) 7-to-13 TeV cross section ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$.

$\psi$(2S) 8-to-13 TeV cross section ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$.

$\psi$(2S)-to-J/$\psi$ cross section ratio as a function of $\sqrt{s}$.

Integrated production cross section of J/$\psi$.

Integrated production cross section of $\psi$(2S).

Integrated production cross section of $\Upsilon$(1S).

Integrated production cross section of $\Upsilon$(2S).

Integrated production cross section of $\Upsilon$(3S).

$\Upsilon$(2S)-to-$\Upsilon$(1S) cross section ratio.

$\Upsilon$(3S)-to-$\Upsilon$(1S) cross section ratio.

Differential cross section of isolated photons as a function of $x_\mathrm{T}^{\gamma}$ measured in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7$ TeV.

Post-fit distributions for the number of jets ($N_{j}$) in CR 1b(-). The QmisID represents the backgrounds with a mis-assigned charge. HF e and HF $\mu$ are the backgrounds with fake/non-prompt leptons. Mat. Conv. and Low $m_{\gamma*}$ are the material and virtual photon conversions.

Post-fit distribution for the difference between the number of positive events and the number of negative events ($N_{+}-N_{-}$) as a function of the number of jets ($N_{j}$) in the sum of four $t\bar{t}W$ CRs and the SR.

Post-fit distributions for the fitted variables in the CRs for the fake/non-prompt lepton background - CR HF e. The QmisID represents the backgrounds with a mis-assigned charge. HF e and HF $\mu$ are the backgrounds with fake/non-prompt leptons. Mat. Conv. and Low $m_{\gamma*}$ are the material and virtual photon conversions.

Post-fit distributions for the fitted variables in the CRs for the fake/non-prompt lepton background - CR HF $\mu$. The QmisID represents the backgrounds with a mis-assigned charge. HF e and HF $\mu$ are the backgrounds with fake/non-prompt leptons. Mat. Conv. and Low $m_{\gamma*}$ are the material and virtual photon conversions.

Post-fit distributions for the fitted variables in the CRs for the fake/non-prompt lepton background - CR Mat. Conv.. The QmisID represents the backgrounds with a mis-assigned charge. HF e and HF $\mu$ are the backgrounds with fake/non-prompt leptons. Mat. Conv. and Low $m_{\gamma*}$ are the material and virtual photon conversions.

Post-fit distributions for the fitted variables in the CRs for the fake/non-prompt lepton background - CR Low $m_{\gamma*}$. The QmisID represents the backgrounds with a mis-assigned charge. HF e and HF $\mu$ are the backgrounds with fake/non-prompt leptons. Mat. Conv. and Low $m_{\gamma*}$ are the material and virtual photon conversions.

Comparison between data and the predictions after a fit to data for the GNN distribution in the SR. The QmisID represents the backgrounds with a mis-assigned charge. HF e and HF $\mu$ are the backgrounds with fake/non-prompt leptons. Mat. Conv. and Low $m_{\gamma*}$ are the material and virtual photon conversions.

Comparison between data and prediction after the fit to data in the signal-enriched region with GNN >= 0.6 for the distributions of the number of jets. The QmisID represents the backgrounds with a mis-assigned charge. HF e and HF $\mu$ are the backgrounds with fake/non-prompt leptons. Mat. Conv. and Low $m_{\gamma*}$ are the material and virtual photon conversions.

Comparison between data and prediction after the fit to data in the signal-enriched region with GNN >= 0.6 for the distributions of the number of b-jets. The QmisID represents the backgrounds with a mis-assigned charge. HF e and HF $\mu$ are the backgrounds with fake/non-prompt leptons. Mat. Conv. and Low $m_{\gamma*}$ are the material and virtual photon conversions.

Comparison between data and prediction after the fit to data in the signal-enriched region with GNN >= 0.6 for the distributions of the sum of the four highest PCBT scores of jets in the event. The QmisID represents the backgrounds with a mis-assigned charge. HF e and HF $\mu$ are the backgrounds with fake/non-prompt leptons. Mat. Conv. and Low $m_{\gamma*}$ are the material and virtual photon conversions.

Comparison between data and prediction after the fit to data in the signal-enriched region with GNN >= 0.6 for the distributions of the sum of transverse momenta over all jets and leptons in the event. The QmisID represents the backgrounds with a mis-assigned charge. HF e and HF $\mu$ are the backgrounds with fake/non-prompt leptons. Mat. Conv. and Low $m_{\gamma*}$ are the material and virtual photon conversions.

Two-dimensional negative log-likelihood contour for the $t\bar{t}t$ cross section ($\sigma_{t\bar{t}t}$) versus the $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ cross section ($\sigma_{t\bar{t}t\bar{t}}$) when the normalisation of both processes are treated as free parameters in the fit.

The negative log-likelihood values as a function of the Higgs oblique parameter $\hat{H}$.

The measured and expected cross-sections of $t\bar{t}t\bar{t}$ production.

Observed 68% CL Limit Contour in $\kappa_t,\alpha$ with $t\bar tt\bar t$ parameterized as a function of $\kappa_t,\alpha$, and the $t\bar tH$ parameterization profiled. This is the lower part of the contour.

Observed 68% CL Limit Contour in $\kappa_t,\alpha$ with $t\bar tt\bar t$ parameterized as a function of $\kappa_t,\alpha$, and the $t\bar tH$ parameterization profiled. This is the upper part of the contour.

Observed 95% CL Limit Contour in $\kappa_t,\alpha$ with $t\bar tt\bar t$ parameterized as a function of $\kappa_t,\alpha$, and the $t\bar tH$ parameterization profiled.

Expected 68% CL Limit Contour in $\kappa_t,\alpha$ with $t\bar tt\bar t$ parameterized as a function of $\kappa_t,\alpha$, and the $t\bar tH$ parameterization profiled.

Expected 95% CL Limit Contour in $\kappa_t,\alpha$ with $t\bar tt\bar t$ parameterized as a function of $\kappa_t,\alpha$, and the $t\bar tH$ parameterization profiled.

Observed 68% CL Limit Contour in $\kappa_t,\alpha$ with $t\bar tt\bar t$ parameterized as a function of $\kappa_t,\alpha$, and the $t\bar tH$ parameterization profiled. This is the lower part of the contour.

Observed 68% CL Limit Contour in $\kappa_t,\alpha$ with $t\bar tt\bar t$ parameterized as a function of $\kappa_t,\alpha$, and the $t\bar tH$ parameterization profiled. This is the upper part of the contour.

Observed 95% CL Limit Contour in $\kappa_t,\alpha$ with $t\bar tt\bar t$ parameterized as a function of $\kappa_t,\alpha$, and the $t\bar tH$ parameterization profiled.

Expected 68% CL Limit Contour in $\kappa_t,\alpha$ with $t\bar tt\bar t$ parameterized as a function of $\kappa_t,\alpha$, and the $t\bar tH$ parameterization profiled.

Expected 95% CL Limit Contour in $\kappa_t,\alpha$ with $t\bar tt\bar t$ parameterized as a function of $\kappa_t,\alpha$, and the $t\bar tH$ parameterization profiled.

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $K^+$ at 13$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $K^-$ at 13$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $p$ at 19$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $\pi^+$ at 19$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $\pi^-$ at 19$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $K^+$ at 19$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $K^-$ at 19$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $p$ at 30$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $\bar{p}$ at 30$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $\pi^+$ at 30$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $\pi^-$ at 30$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $K^+$ at 30$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $K^-$ at 30$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $p$ at 40$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $\bar{p}$ at 40$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $\pi^+$ at 40$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $\pi^-$ at 40$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $K^+$ at 40$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $K^-$ at 40$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $p$ at 75$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $\bar{p}$ at 75$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $\pi^+$ at 75$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $\pi^-$ at 75$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $K^+$ at 75$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $K^-$ at 75$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $p$ at 150$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $\bar{p}$ at 150$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $\pi^+$ at 150$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $\pi^-$ at 150$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $K^+$ at 150$A$ GeV/c

Two-dimensional distributions ($y$ vs. $p_T$ ) of double differential yields of $K^-$ at 150$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $\pi^+$ at 13$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $\pi^-$ at 13$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $\pi^+$ at 19$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $\pi^-$ at 19$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $\pi^+$ at 30$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $\pi^-$ at 30$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $\pi^+$ at 40$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $\pi^-$ at 40$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $\pi^+$ at 75$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $\pi^-$ at 75$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $\pi^+$ at 150$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $\pi^-$ at 150$A$ GeV/c

The parameters of double-Gaussian fit to $\pi^+$ rapidity spectra

The parameters of double-Gaussian fit to $\pi^-$ rapidity spectra

Rapidity spectrum of negatively charged pions obtained with $h^-$ method in central Ar+Sc collisions at 30$A$ GeV/$c$ The results of $h^-$ analysis of Ar+Sc collisions used for comparison are published in reference [17]

Rapidity spectrum of negatively charged pions obtained with $h^-$ method in central Ar+Sc collisions at 150$A$ GeV/$c$

Rapidity dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T$ fitted to $p_T$ spectrum of $K^+$ at 13$A$ GeV/$c$

Rapidity dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T$ fitted to $p_T$ spectrum of $K^+$ at 19$A$ GeV/$c$

Rapidity dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T$ fitted to $p_T$ spectrum of $K^+$ at 30$A$ GeV/$c$

Rapidity dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T$ fitted to $p_T$ spectrum of $K^+$ at 40$A$ GeV/$c$

Rapidity dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T$ fitted to $p_T$ spectrum of $K^+$ at 75$A$ GeV/$c$

Rapidity dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T$ fitted to $p_T$ spectrum of $K^+$ at 150$A$ GeV/$c$

Rapidity dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T$ fitted to $p_T$ spectrum of $K^-$ at 13$A$ GeV/$c$

Rapidity dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T$ fitted to $p_T$ spectrum of $K^-$ at 19$A$ GeV/$c$

Rapidity dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T$ fitted to $p_T$ spectrum of $K^-$ at 30$A$ GeV/$c$

Rapidity dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T$ fitted to $p_T$ spectrum of $K^-$ at 40$A$ GeV/$c$

Rapidity dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T$ fitted to $p_T$ spectrum of $K^-$ at 75$A$ GeV/$c$

Rapidity dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T$ fitted to $p_T$ spectrum of $K^-$ at 150$A$ GeV/$c$

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $K^+$ at 13$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $K^-$ at 13$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $K^+$ at 19$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $K^-$ at 19$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $K^+$ at 30$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $K^-$ at 30$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $K^+$ at 40$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $K^-$ at 40$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $K^+$ at 75$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $K^-$ at 75$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $K^+$ at 150$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $K^-$ at 150$A$ GeV/c

The parameters of double-Gaussian fit to $K^+$ rapidity spectra

The parameters of double-Gaussian fit to $K^-$ rapidity spectra

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $p$ at 13$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $p$ at 19$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $p$ at 30$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $\bar{p}$ at 30$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $p$ at 40$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $\bar{p}$ at 40$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $p$ at 75$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $\bar{p}$ at 75$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $p$ at 150$A$ GeV/c

Rapidity ($y$) spectra of $\bar{p}$ at 150$A$ GeV/c

The parameters of double-Gaussian fit to $\bar{p}$ rapidity spectra

The energy dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T(K^+)$ of $p_T$ spectra at mid-rapidity of positively charged $K$ mesons for ArSc. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T(K^+)$ of $p_T$ spectra at mid-rapidity of positively charged $K$ mesons for BeBe. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T(K^+)$ of $p_T$ spectra at mid-rapidity of positively charged $K$ mesons for ppWorld. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T(K^+)$ of $p_T$ spectra at mid-rapidity of positively charged $K$ mesons for pp. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T(K^+)$ of $p_T$ spectra at mid-rapidity of positively charged $K$ mesons for AuAu. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T(K^+)$ of $p_T$ spectra at mid-rapidity of positively charged $K$ mesons for PbPb. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T(K^-)$ of $p_T$ spectra at mid-rapidity of negatively charged $K$ mesons for ArSc. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T(K^-)$ of $p_T$ spectra at mid-rapidity of negatively charged $K$ mesons for BeBe. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T(K^-)$ of $p_T$ spectra at mid-rapidity of negatively charged $K$ mesons for ppWorld. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T(K^-)$ of $p_T$ spectra at mid-rapidity of negatively charged $K$ mesons for pp. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T(K^-)$ of $p_T$ spectra at mid-rapidity of negatively charged $K$ mesons for AuAu. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the inverse slope parameter $T(K^-)$ of $p_T$ spectra at mid-rapidity of negatively charged $K$ mesons for PbPb. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $K^+/\pi^+$ ratio at mid-rapidity for ArSc. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $K^+/\pi^+$ ratio at mid-rapidity for BeBe. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $K^+/\pi^+$ ratio at mid-rapidity for ppWorld. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $K^+/\pi^+$ ratio at mid-rapidity for pp. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $K^+/\pi^+$ ratio at mid-rapidity for AuAu. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $K^+/\pi^+$ ratio at mid-rapidity for PbPb. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $K^-/\pi^-$ ratio at mid-rapidity for ArSc. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $K^-/\pi^-$ ratio at mid-rapidity for BeBe. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $K^-/\pi^-$ ratio at mid-rapidity for ppWorld. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $K^-/\pi^-$ ratio at mid-rapidity for pp. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $K^-/\pi^-$ ratio at mid-rapidity for AuAu. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $K^-/\pi^-$ ratio at mid-rapidity for PbPb. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $\langle K^+\rangle/\langle\pi^+\rangle$ mean multiplicity ratio for ArSc. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $\langle K^+\rangle/\langle\pi^+\rangle$ mean multiplicity ratio for BeBe. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $\langle K^+\rangle/\langle\pi^+\rangle$ mean multiplicity ratio for ppWorld. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $\langle K^+\rangle/\langle\pi^+\rangle$ mean multiplicity ratio for pp. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $\langle K^+\rangle/\langle\pi^+\rangle$ mean multiplicity ratio for AuAu. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $\langle K^+\rangle/\langle\pi^+\rangle$ mean multiplicity ratio for PbPb. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $\langle K^-\rangle/\langle\pi^-\rangle$ mean multiplicity ratio for ArSc. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $\langle K^-\rangle/\langle\pi^-\rangle$ mean multiplicity ratio for BeBe. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $\langle K^-\rangle/\langle\pi^-\rangle$ mean multiplicity ratio for ppWorld. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $\langle K^-\rangle/\langle\pi^-\rangle$ mean multiplicity ratio for pp. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $\langle K^-\rangle/\langle\pi^-\rangle$ mean multiplicity ratio for AuAu. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

The energy dependence of the $\langle K^-\rangle/\langle\pi^-\rangle$ mean multiplicity ratio for PbPb. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2-4,13,17,53-64]

Proton rapidity spectra in central Be+Be collisions at $19A$ GeV/$c$ beam momentum. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2,13,17]

Proton rapidity spectra in central Be+Be collisions at $30A$ GeV/$c$ beam momentum. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2,13,17]

Proton rapidity spectra in central Be+Be collisions at $40A$ GeV/$c$ beam momentum. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2,13,17]

Proton rapidity spectra in central Be+Be collisions at $75A$ GeV/$c$ beam momentum. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2,13,17]

Proton rapidity spectra in central Be+Be collisions at $150A$ GeV/$c$ beam momentum. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2,13,17]

Proton rapidity spectra in inelastic p+p collisions at $20$ GeV/$c$ beam momentum. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2,13,17]

Proton rapidity spectra in inelastic p+p collisions at $30$ GeV/$c$ beam momentum. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2,13,17]

Proton rapidity spectra in inelastic p+p collisions at $40$ GeV/$c$ beam momentum. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2,13,17]

Proton rapidity spectra in inelastic p+p collisions at $75$ GeV/$c$ beam momentum. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2,13,17]

Proton rapidity spectra in inelastic p+p collisions at $150$ GeV/$c$ beam momentum. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2,13,17]

Proton rapidity spectra in central Pb+Pb collisions at $20A$ GeV/$c$ beam momentum. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2,13,17]

Proton rapidity spectra in central Pb+Pb collisions at $30A$ GeV/$c$ beam momentum. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2,13,17]

Proton rapidity spectra in central Pb+Pb collisions at $40A$ GeV/$c$ beam momentum. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2,13,17]

Proton rapidity spectra in central Pb+Pb collisions at $80A$ GeV/$c$ beam momentum. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2,13,17]

Proton rapidity spectra in central Pb+Pb collisions at $150A$ GeV/$c$ beam momentum. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2,13,17]

System size dependence of the $K^+/\pi^+$ ratio at mid-rapidity in $central$ nucleus-nucleus and inelastic $p$+$p$ interactions obtained at beam momenta of $\approx 150A$ GeV/$c$. The data used for comparison, other than Ar+Sc, are published in references [2,13,17,53].

Signal selection efficiency times acceptance for charged Higgs boson with masses between $60\,$GeV to $168\,$GeV. The efficiency times acceptance drops at high masses rapidly due to the low momentum of the $b$-quark produced together with the charged Higgs boson. For the $168\,$GeV mass point the efficiency times acceptance is larger than for the $160\,$GeV mass point due to having a higher probability that the top quark, which decays into the charged Higgs boson and a $b$-quark, is off-shell.

Best fit values of $\mu_{t\bar{t}}$ and $f_{\mathrm{HF}}$ parameters at charged Higgs masses between $60\,$GeV and $168\,$GeV.

Correlation matrix from inclusive and normalized cross section measurements

Fiducial cross sections for $N_j = 0, 1, \geq 2$ jets. The total uncertainty is reported.

Covariance Matrix from fiducial and normalized cross sections measurements (total, and one and two jet bin fractions).

Normalized distributions of EA in HT ($E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}>4$ GeV) events selected by three ranges of leading jet $p_\mathrm{T}$. Events require $p_\mathrm{T,jet}^\mathrm{raw,lead}>4~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ and the presence of a recoil jet.

Jet spectra per trigger for trigger-side ($|\phi_\mathrm{jet}-\phi_\mathrm{trig}|<\pi/3$) and recoil-side ($|\phi_\mathrm{jet}-\phi_\mathrm{trig}|>2\pi/3$). Jets are of $R=0.4$, and the offline trigger threshold is $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}>4$ GeV. Spectra are shown for high- and low-EA events.

Ratio of the semi-inclusive jet spectra for trigger-side ($|\phi_\mathrm{jet}-\phi_\mathrm{trig}|<\pi/3$) and recoil-side ($|\phi_\mathrm{jet}-\phi_\mathrm{trig}|>2\pi/3$) in high-EA to low-EA events. Jets are of $R=0.4$, and the offline trigger threshold is $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{trig}>4$ GeV.

Distributions of the azimuthal separation between the two highest-$p_\mathrm{T}$ jets for high- and low-EA events for two sets of minimum $p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{raw}$.

Ratios of distributions of the azimuthal separation between the two highest-$p_\mathrm{T}$ jets for two sets of minimum $p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{raw}$ for high-EA events relative to low-EA events.

Distributions of dijet $p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{raw}$ imbalance, $A_{J}$, for high- and low-EA events for two set of minimum $p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{raw}$ requirements.

Rastio of distributions of dijet $p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{raw}$ imbalance, $A_{J}$, for two sets of minimum $p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{raw}$ requirements for high-EA events relative to low-EA events.

The 95% CL upper limits on the branching fraction $\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{H \to SS})$ with $\mathrm{S}\to\tau\tau$ decay, for different LLP masses $m_{\mathrm{S}}$ and proper decay lengths $c\tau_{0}$.

The 95% CL limits on the LLP mass $m_{\mathrm{S}}$ for different proper decay lengths $c\tau_{0}$ assuming a branching fraction of 1% for the $\mathrm{H \to SS}$ decay, and with subsequent $\mathrm{S \to b\overline{b}}$ decay.

The 95% CL limits on the LLP mass $m_{\mathrm{S}}$ for different proper decay lengths $c\tau_{0}$ assuming a branching fraction of 1% for the $\mathrm{H \to SS}$ decay, and with subsequent $\mathrm{S \to d \overline{d}}$ decay.

The 95% CL limits on the dark-sector top quark partner mass $m_{T}$ for different hidden glueball masses $m_{0}$ in the fraternal twin Higgs model.

The 95% CL limits on the dark-sector top quark partner mass $m_{T}$ for different hidden glueball masses $m_{0}$ in the folded SUSY model.

Observed and theoretical cross sections. In the observed, the first uncertainty is statistical, the second is the systematic, and the third the luminosity. In the theoretical, the first uncertainty is due to scale variations, the second due to the choice of PDF. The theoretical cross section has been computed at approximate third-order in QCD, with the addition of third-order corrections of soft gluon emission terms, assuming a top quark mass of 172.5 GeV and using the PDF4LHC21 PDF set.

The number of estimated signal and background events after the fit in the 1j1b, 2j1b, and 2j2b regions compared to the observed number of events. The total uncertainties in the estimated events after the fit are given.

Normalised fiducial differential tW production cross section as a function of the $Leading$ $lepton$ $p_{T}$. The horizontal bars on the points show the bin width. Predictions from POWHEG (PH) DR and DS + PYTHIA 8 (P8), POWHEG DR + HERWIG 7 (H7), MADGRAPH5_aMC@NLO (aMC) DR, DR2, DS and DS with a dynamic factor + PYTHIA 8 are also shown. The grey band represents the statistical uncertainty and the yellow band the total uncertainty. In the lower panels, the ratio of the predictions to the data is shown.

Normalised fiducial differential tW production cross section as a function of the $p_{Z}(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j)$. The horizontal bars on the points show the bin width. Predictions from POWHEG (PH) DR and DS + PYTHIA 8 (P8), POWHEG DR + HERWIG 7 (H7), MADGRAPH5_aMC@NLO (aMC) DR, DR2, DS and DS with a dynamic factor + PYTHIA 8 are also shown. The grey band represents the statistical uncertainty and the yellow band the total uncertainty. In the lower panels, the ratio of the predictions to the data is shown.

Normalised fiducial differential tW production cross section as a function of the $Jet$ $p_{T}$. The horizontal bars on the points show the bin width. Predictions from POWHEG (PH) DR and DS + PYTHIA 8 (P8), POWHEG DR + HERWIG 7 (H7), MADGRAPH5_aMC@NLO (aMC) DR, DR2, DS and DS with a dynamic factor + PYTHIA 8 are also shown. The grey band represents the statistical uncertainty and the yellow band the total uncertainty. In the lower panels, the ratio of the predictions to the data is shown.

Normalised fiducial differential tW production cross section as a function of the $m(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j)$. The horizontal bars on the points show the bin width. Predictions from POWHEG (PH) DR and DS + PYTHIA 8 (P8), POWHEG DR + HERWIG 7 (H7), MADGRAPH5_aMC@NLO (aMC) DR, DR2, DS and DS with a dynamic factor + PYTHIA 8 are also shown. The grey band represents the statistical uncertainty and the yellow band the total uncertainty. In the lower panels, the ratio of the predictions to the data is shown.

Normalised fiducial differential tW production cross section as a function of the $\Delta\phi(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm})/\pi$. The horizontal bars on the points show the bin width. Predictions from POWHEG (PH) DR and DS + PYTHIA 8 (P8), POWHEG DR + HERWIG 7 (H7), MADGRAPH5_aMC@NLO (aMC) DR, DR2, DS and DS with a dynamic factor + PYTHIA 8 are also shown. The grey band represents the statistical uncertainty and the yellow band the total uncertainty. In the lower panels, the ratio of the predictions to the data is shown.

Normalised fiducial differential tW production cross section as a function of the $m_{T}(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j, p_{T}^{miss})$. The horizontal bars on the points show the bin width. Predictions from POWHEG (PH) DR and DS + PYTHIA 8 (P8), POWHEG DR + HERWIG 7 (H7), MADGRAPH5_aMC@NLO (aMC) DR, DR2, DS and DS with a dynamic factor + PYTHIA 8 are also shown. The grey band represents the statistical uncertainty and the yellow band the total uncertainty. In the lower panels, the ratio of the predictions to the data is shown.

The p-values from the goodness-of-fit tests comparing the six differential cross section measurements with the predictions from POWHEG (PH) DR and DS + PYTHIA 8 (P8), POWHEG DR + HERWIG 7 (H7), MADGRAPH5 aMC@NLO (aMC) DR, DR2, DS, and DS with a dynamic factor + PYTHIA 8. The complete covariance matrix from the results and the statistical uncertainties in the predictions are taken into account.

Distribution of the RF output for events in the 1j1b region. The number of observed events (points) and estimated signal and background events (filled histograms) before the maximum likelihood fit are shown. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainty in the data, and the hatched band the total uncertainty in the estimated events before the fit. The lower panels display the ratio of the data to the sum of the estimated events (points) before the fit, with the bands giving the corresponding uncertainties.

Distribution of the RF output for events in the 2j1b region. The number of observed events (points) and estimated signal and background events (filled histograms) before the maximum likelihood fit are shown. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainty in the data, and the hatched band the total uncertainty in the estimated events before the fit. The lower panels display the ratio of the data to the sum of the estimated events (points) before the fit, with the bands giving the corresponding uncertainties.

Distribution of the Subleading jet $p_{T}$ for events in the 2j2b region. The number of observed events (points) and estimated signal and background events (filled histograms) before the maximum likelihood fit are shown. The vertical bars on the points represent the statistical uncertainty in the data, and the hatched band the total uncertainty in the estimated events before the fit. The lower panels display the ratio of the data to the sum of the estimated events (points) before the fit, with the bands giving the corresponding uncertainties.

Response matrix between detector and particle level for the $Leading$ $lepton$ $p_{T}$.

Response matrix between detector and particle level for the $p_{Z}(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j)$.

Response matrix between detector and particle level for the $Jet$ $p_{T}$.

Response matrix between detector and particle level for the $m(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j)$.

Response matrix between detector and particle level for the $\Delta\phi(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm})/\pi$.

Response matrix between detector and particle level for the $m_{T}(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j, p_{T}^{miss})$.

Covariance matrix including all uncertainties of the normalised differential cross section in bins of $Leading$ $lepton$ $p_{T}$ in units of $1/GeV^{2}$.

Covariance matrix including all uncertainties of the normalised differential cross section in bins of $p_{Z}(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j)$ in units of $1/GeV^{2}$.

Covariance matrix including all uncertainties of the normalised differential cross section in bins of $Jet$ $p_{T}$ in units of $1/GeV^{2}$.

Covariance matrix including all uncertainties of the normalised differential cross section in bins of $m(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j)$ in units of $1/GeV^{2}$.

Covariance matrix including all uncertainties of the normalised differential cross section in bins of $\Delta\phi(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm})/\pi$ in units of 1.

Covariance matrix including all uncertainties of the normalised differential cross section in bins of $m_{T}(e^{\pm}, \mu^{\pm}, j, p_{T}^{miss})$ in units of $1/GeV^{2}$.

The measured $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ differential cross-sections in the $2\mu+\text{jets}$ region of the incluse jet phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ differential cross-sections in the $2e+\text{jets}$ region of the incluse jet phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ in the inclusive jet phase space for $1\mu+\text{jets}$. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ in the inclusive jet phase space for $1e+\text{jets}$. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ in the inclusive jet phase space for $2\mu+\text{jets}$. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ in the inclusive jet phase space for $2e+\text{jets}$. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ differential cross-sections in the $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase spaces, compared with the SM predictions. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ differential cross-sections in the $1\mu+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ differential cross-sections in the $1e+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ differential cross-sections in the $2\mu+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ differential cross-sections in the $2e+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ in the VBF phase space for $1\mu+\text{jets}$. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ in the VBF phase space for $1e+\text{jets}$. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ in the VBF phase space for $2\mu+\text{jets}$. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ in the VBF phase space for $2e+\text{jets}$. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $m_{jj}$ distribution in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions, for the $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $m_{jj}$ distribution in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions, for the $1\mu+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $m_{jj}$ distribution in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions, for the $1e+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $m_{jj}$ distribution in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions, for the $2\mu+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $m_{jj}$ distribution in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions, for the $2e+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $m_{jj}$ in the $1\mu+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $m_{jj}$ in the $e+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $m_{jj}$ in the $2\mu+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $m_{jj}$ in the $2e+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ distributions in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions for the $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ distributions in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions for the $1\mu+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ distributions in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions for the $1e+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ distributions in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions for the $2\mu+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ distributions in the VBF phase space compared with the SM predictions for the $2e+\text{jets}$ region. The middle panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties, while the lower panels show the relative contributions from different SM processes relative to the total MEPS@NLO prediction. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ in the $1\mu+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ in the $1e+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ in the $2\mu+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

Comparison with SM predictions of the $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ ratios of the measured differential cross-sections for $\Delta\phi_{jj}$ in the $2e+\text{jets}$ region of the VBF phase space. The bottom panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with their uncertainties. Note that individually numbered PDF components ('dK_PDF_') in the uncertainty breakdown correspond to NNPDF Hessian eigenvectors. Uncertainty components labeled 'VV_dK' include Vjj processes.

The measured Z &rarr; &nu;&nu; cross-section, differential in p_T^Z in the (a) single jet and (b) VBF phase spaces, and differential in (c) m_jj and (d) &Delta;&phi;_jj in the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red hatched band).

The measured Z &rarr; &nu;&nu; cross-section, differential in p_T^Z in the (a) single jet and (b) VBF phase spaces, and differential in (c) m_jj and (d) &Delta;&phi;_jj in the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red hatched band).

The measured Z &rarr; &nu;&nu; cross-section, differential in p_T^Z in the (a) single jet and (b) VBF phase spaces, and differential in (c) m_jj and (d) &Delta;&phi;_jj in the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red hatched band).

The measured Z &rarr; &nu;&nu; cross-section, differential in p_T^Z in the (a) single jet and (b) VBF phase spaces, and differential in (c) m_jj and (d) &Delta;&phi;_jj in the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red hatched band).

The measured p_T^Z, p_T^W and p_T^&gamma; differential cross-sections in the inclusive jet phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) &gamma;+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2&mu;+jets,(e) e+jets and (f) &mu;+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured p_T^Z, p_T^W and p_T^&gamma; differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) &gamma;+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2&mu;+jets, (e) e+jets and (f) &mu;+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured m_jj differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) &gamma;+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2&mu;+jets, (e) e+jets and (f) &mu;+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured &Delta;&phi;_jj differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets (b) &gamma;+jets (c) 2e+jets (d) 2&mu;+jets (e) e+jets and (f) &mu;+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured p_T^Z, p_T^W and p_T^&gamma; differential cross-sections in the inclusive jet phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) &gamma;+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2&mu;+jets,(e) e+jets and (f) &mu;+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured p_T^Z, p_T^W and p_T^&gamma; differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) &gamma;+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2&mu;+jets, (e) e+jets and (f) &mu;+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured m_jj differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) &gamma;+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2&mu;+jets, (e) e+jets and (f) &mu;+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured &Delta;&phi;_jj differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets (b) &gamma;+jets (c) 2e+jets (d) 2&mu;+jets (e) e+jets and (f) &mu;+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured p_T^Z, p_T^W and p_T^&gamma; differential cross-sections in the inclusive jet phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) &gamma;+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2&mu;+jets,(e) e+jets and (f) &mu;+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured p_T^Z, p_T^W and p_T^&gamma; differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) &gamma;+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2&mu;+jets, (e) e+jets and (f) &mu;+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured m_jj differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) &gamma;+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2&mu;+jets, (e) e+jets and (f) &mu;+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured &Delta;&phi;_jj differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets (b) &gamma;+jets (c) 2e+jets (d) 2&mu;+jets (e) e+jets and (f) &mu;+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured p_T^Z, p_T^W and p_T^&gamma; differential cross-sections in the inclusive jet phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) &gamma;+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2&mu;+jets,(e) e+jets and (f) &mu;+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured p_T^Z, p_T^W and p_T^&gamma; differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) &gamma;+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2&mu;+jets, (e) e+jets and (f) &mu;+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured m_jj differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets, (b) &gamma;+jets, (c) 2e+jets, (d) 2&mu;+jets, (e) e+jets and (f) &mu;+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured &Delta;&phi;_jj differential cross-sections in the VBF phase spaces compared with the SM predictions: (a) p_T^miss+jets (b) &gamma;+jets (c) 2e+jets (d) 2&mu;+jets (e) e+jets and (f) &mu;+jets. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red shading).

The measured &gamma;+jets cross-section, differential in p_T^&gamma; in the (a) single jet and (b) VBF phase spaces, and differential in (c) m_jj and (d) &Delta;&phi;_jj in the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red hatched band).

The measured &gamma;+jets cross-section, differential in p_T^&gamma; in the (a) single jet and (b) VBF phase spaces, and differential in (c) m_jj and (d) &Delta;&phi;_jj in the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red hatched band).

The measured &gamma;+jets cross-section, differential in p_T^&gamma; in the (a) single jet and (b) VBF phase spaces, and differential in (c) m_jj and (d) &Delta;&phi;_jj in the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red hatched band).

The measured &gamma;+jets cross-section, differential in p_T^&gamma; in the (a) single jet and (b) VBF phase spaces, and differential in (c) m_jj and (d) &Delta;&phi;_jj in the VBF phase space, compared with the SM predictions. The lower panels show the ratios of the predictions to the data, along with the data statistical uncertainties (black bars) and systematic uncertainties (red hatched band).

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 7a

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 7b

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 8a

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 8b

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 8c

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 8d

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 9a

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 9b

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 9c

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 9d

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 3b of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 3c of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 3d of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 3e of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 5b of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 5c of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 5d of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 7b of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 7c of Auxiliary Material

SM processes contributing to the fiducial SM predictions shown in Figure 7d of Auxiliary Material

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 7a) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 7a).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 7a) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 7a) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9a).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 7a) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9b).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8c) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8c).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8c) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8c) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8c) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8a) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8a).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8a) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8a) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8a) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8d) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8d).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8d) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3e (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8d) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9c).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8d) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9d).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8b) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8b).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8b) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8b) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 8b) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $1\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 2c (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $1\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 2c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 1e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 10a) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 1e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 10a).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $2\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 2d (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $2\mu$ + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 2d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 2e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 10b) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 2e + jets region, $\geq 1$ jet phase space (Figure 10b).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9a).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9b).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3d (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3d (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3d (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3b (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3b (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3b (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3e (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3e (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3e (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9c).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3e (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9d).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3c (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3c (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 3c (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 4c (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 4c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 4a (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 4a (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 4d (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 4d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 4b (aux)) and $p_\text{T}^\text{recoil}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 4b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9a) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9a).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9a) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9b).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5d (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5d (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5b (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5b (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9c) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9c).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9c) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9d).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5c (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 5c (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 6c (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 6c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 6a (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 6a (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 10c) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 10c).

Statistical correlations between $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 6b (aux)) and $m_{\text jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 6b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9b) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $p_\text{T}^\text{miss}$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9b).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7d (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7d (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7b (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9d) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 9d).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7c (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 7c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 8c (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $1\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 8c (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 8a (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 1e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 8a (aux)).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 10d) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ $2\mu$ + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 10d).

Statistical correlations between $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 8b (aux)) and $\Delta\phi_\text{jj}$ observable, $\text{R}_\text{miss}$ observable, $R_{miss}$ 2e + jets region, VBF phase space (Figure 8b (aux)).

Yields of $\Xi^{\pm}$ per trigger particle per unit $\Delta\eta\Delta\varphi$ area in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV, as a function of the $\Xi^{\pm}$ $p_\rm{T}$. Trigger particles are charged particles with $p_\rm{T}>3$ GeV/c. The trigger-particle-$\Xi^{\pm}$ correlation is integrated in the ranges $-1.2<\Delta\eta<1.2$ and $-\pi/2<\Delta\varphi<3/2\pi$.

Transverse-to-leading yields of $\Xi^{\pm}$ per trigger particle per unit $\Delta\eta\Delta\varphi$ area in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV, as a function of the $\Xi^{\pm}$ $p_\rm{T}$. Trigger particles are charged particles with $p_\rm{T}>3$ GeV/c. The trigger-particle-$\Xi^{\pm}$ correlation is integrated in the ranges $0.86<|\Delta\eta|<1.2$ and $0.96<\Delta\varphi<1.8$.

Toward-leading yields of $\Xi^{\pm}$ per trigger particle per unit $\Delta\eta\Delta\varphi$ area in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV, as a function of the $\Xi^{\pm}$ $p_\rm{T}$. Trigger particles are charged particles with $p_\rm{T}>3$ GeV/c. The trigger-particle-$\Xi^{\pm}$ correlation is integrated in the ranges $|\Delta\eta|<0.86$ and $|\Delta\varphi|<1.1$.

Yields of $\rm K^{0}_\rm{S}$ per trigger particle per unit $\Delta\eta\Delta\varphi$ area in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=5.02$ TeV, as a function of the $\rm K^{0}_\rm{S}$ $p_\rm{T}$. Trigger particles are charged particles with $p_\rm{T}>3$ GeV/c. The trigger-particle-$\rm K^{0}_\rm{S}$ correlation is integrated in the ranges $-1.2<\Delta\eta<1.2$ and $-\pi/2<\Delta\varphi<3/2\pi$.

Transverse-to-leading yields of $\rm K^{0}_\rm{S}$ per trigger particle per unit $\Delta\eta\Delta\varphi$ area in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=5.02$ TeV, as a function of the $\rm K^{0}_\rm{S}$ $p_\rm{T}$. Trigger particles are charged particles with $p_\rm{T}>3$ GeV/c. The trigger-particle-$\rm K^{0}_\rm{S}$ correlation is integrated in the ranges $0.86<|\Delta\eta|<1.2$ and $0.96<\Delta\varphi<1.8$.

Toward-leading yields of $\rm K^{0}_\rm{S}$ per trigger particle per unit $\Delta\eta\Delta\varphi$ area in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=5.02$ TeV, as a function of the $\rm K^{0}_\rm{S}$ $p_\rm{T}$. Trigger particles are charged particles with $p_\rm{T}>3$ GeV/c. The trigger-particle-$\rm K^{0}_\rm{S}$ correlation is integrated in the ranges $|\Delta\eta|<0.86$ and $|\Delta\varphi|<1.1$.

Yields of $\Xi^{\pm}$ per trigger particle per unit $\Delta\eta\Delta\varphi$ area in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=5.02$ TeV, as a function of the $\Xi^{\pm}$ $p_\rm{T}$. Trigger particles are charged particles with $p_\rm{T}>3$ GeV/c. The trigger-particle-$\Xi^{\pm}$ correlation is integrated in the ranges $-1.2<\Delta\eta<1.2$ and $-\pi/2<\Delta\varphi<3/2\pi$.

Transverse-to-leading yields of $\Xi^{\pm}$ per trigger particle per unit $\Delta\eta\Delta\varphi$ area in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=5.02$ TeV, as a function of the $\Xi^{\pm}$ $p_\rm{T}$. Trigger particles are charged particles with $p_\rm{T}>3$ GeV/c. The trigger-particle-$\Xi^{\pm}$ correlation is integrated in the ranges $0.86<|\Delta\eta|<1.2$ and $0.96<\Delta\varphi<1.8$.

Toward-leading yields of $\Xi^{\pm}$ per trigger particle per unit $\Delta\eta\Delta\varphi$ area in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=5.02$ TeV, as a function of the $\Xi^{\pm}$ $p_\rm{T}$. Trigger particles are charged particles with $p_\rm{T}>3$ GeV/c. The trigger-particle-$\Xi^{\pm}$ correlation is integrated in the ranges $|\Delta\eta|<0.86$ and $|\Delta\varphi|<1.1$.

Yields of $\rm K^{0}_\rm{S}$ per trigger particle per unit $\Delta\eta\Delta\varphi$ area in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV, as a function of the charged particle multiplicity measured in events with a trigger particle. Trigger particles are charged particles with $p_\rm{T}>3$ GeV/c.

Yields of $\rm K^{0}_\rm{S}$ per trigger particle per unit $\Delta\eta\Delta\varphi$ area in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=5.02$ TeV, as a function of the charged particle multiplicity measured in events with a trigger particle. Trigger particles are charged particles with $p_\rm{T}>3$ GeV/c.

Yields of $\Xi^{\pm}$ per trigger particle per unit $\Delta\eta\Delta\varphi$ area in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV, as a function of the charged particle multiplicity measured in events with a trigger particle. Trigger particles are charged particles with $p_\rm{T}>3$ GeV/c.

Yields of $\Xi^{\pm}$ per trigger particle per unit $\Delta\eta\Delta\varphi$ area in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=5.02$ TeV, as a function of the charged particle multiplicity measured in events with a trigger particle. Trigger particles are charged particles with $p_\rm{T}>3$ GeV/c.

$\Xi^{\pm}/\rm K^{0}_{\rm S}$ in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV, as a function of the charged particle multiplicity measured in events with a trigger particle. Trigger particles are charged particles with $p_\rm{T}>3$ GeV/c.

$\Xi^{\pm}/\rm K^{0}_{\rm S}$ in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=5.02$ TeV, as a function of the charged particle multiplicity measured in events with a trigger particle. Trigger particles are charged particles with $p_\rm{T}>3$ GeV/c.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\ell\ell+E_\text{T}^{\text{miss}}$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for Multilepton.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for combination.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}b\bar{b}$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\tau\tau$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\ell\ell+E_\text{T}^{\text{miss}}$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for Multilepton.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for combination.

Observed and expected 95&percnt; CL upper limits on the signal strength for the inclusive ggF HH production from the bb&#772;&tau;⁺&tau;^-, bb&#772;&gamma;&gamma;, bb&#772;bb&#772;, multilepton and bb&#772;&#8467;&#8467;+E_T^miss decay channels, and their statistical combination. When deriving the limit on &mu;_ggF^HH (&mu;_VBF^HH), the VBF (ggF) HH production cross-section is fixed to the SM predicted value for m_H=125 GeV. The expected limit, along with the &plusmn;1&sigma; and &plusmn;2&sigma; bands, is calculated under the assumption of no HH process and with all NPs profiled to the observed data.

Observed and expected 95&percnt; CL upper limits on the signal strength for the VBF HH production from the bb&#772;&tau;⁺&tau;^-, bb&#772;&gamma;&gamma;, bb&#772;bb&#772;, multilepton and bb&#772;&#8467;&#8467;+E_T^miss decay channels, and their statistical combination. When deriving the limit on &mu;_ggF^HH (&mu;_VBF^HH), the VBF (ggF) HH production cross-section is fixed to the SM predicted value for m_H=125 GeV. The expected limit, along with the &plusmn;1&sigma; and &plusmn;2&sigma; bands, is calculated under the assumption of no HH process and with all NPs profiled to the observed data.

Observed and expected upper limits at 95&percnt; CL on the inclusive ggF and VBF HH production cross-section from the bb&#772;&tau;⁺&tau;^-, bb&#772;&gamma;&gamma;, bb&#772;bb&#772;, multilepton and bb&#772;&#8467;&#8467;+E_T^miss decay channels, and their statistical combination. The Higgs boson mass is set to 125&nbsp;GeV when deriving the predicted SM cross-section (red band). The expected limits, along with the &plusmn;1&sigma; and &plusmn;2&sigma; bands, are calculated under the assumption of no Higgs boson pair production and with all NPs profiled to the observed data.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for $b\bar{b}b\bar{b}$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\tau\tau$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\ell\ell+E_\text{T}^{\text{miss}}$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for Multilepton.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_\lambda$ parameter for combination.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}b\bar{b}$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\tau\tau$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\ell\ell+E_\text{T}^{\text{miss}}$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for Multilepton.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter for combination.

Observed (solid lines) and expected (dashed lines) 95&percnt; CL exclusion limits on the HH production cross-sections of (a) the inclusive ggF and VBF processes as a function of &kappa;_&lambda;, for the bb&#772;&gamma;&gamma; (purple), bb&#772;&tau;⁺&tau;^- (green), multilepton (cyan), bb&#772;bb&#772; (blue) and bb&#772;&#8467;&#8467;+E_T^miss (brown) decay channels and their combination (black). The expected limits assume no HH production. The red line shows the theory prediction for the ggF and VBF HH production cross-section as a function of &kappa;_&lambda;. The bands surrounding the red cross-section lines indicate the theoretical uncertainties on the predicted cross-section.

Observed (solid lines) and expected (dashed lines) 95&percnt; CL exclusion limits on the HH production cross-sections of the VBF process as a function of &kappa;_2V, for the bb&#772;&gamma;&gamma; (purple), bb&#772;&tau;⁺&tau;^- (green), multilepton (cyan), bb&#772;bb&#772; (blue) and bb&#772;&#8467;&#8467;+E_T^miss (brown) decay channels and their combination (black). The expected limits assume no VBF HH production. The ggF HH production cross-section is assumed to be as predicted by the SM. The ggF HH production cross-section is assumed to be as predicted by the SM. The red line shows the predicted VBF HH cross-section as a function of &kappa;_2V. The bands surrounding the red cross-section lines indicate the theoretical uncertainties on the predicted cross-section.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}b\bar{b}$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\tau\tau$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ parameter for combination.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}b\bar{b}$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\tau\tau$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{gghh}$ parameter for combination.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}b\bar{b}$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\tau\tau$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$.

Observed value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ parameter for combination.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}b\bar{b}$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\tau\tau$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ parameter for $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$.

Expected value of the test statistic (-2ln$\Lambda$), as a function of the $c_{tthh}$ parameter for combination.

Observed and expected 95&percnt; CL combined upper limits on the cross-section for the SM and seven BSM HEFT benchmarks (arXiv:2304.01968 [hep-ph]) in the ggF process, describing representative signal kinematics and m_HH shape features obtained by varying multiple HEFT coefficients. The expected limits from the bb&#772;&tau;⁺&tau;^-, bb&#772;&gamma;&gamma; and bb&#772;bb&#772; decay channels are presented as well. Theoretical predictions, estimated using specific sets of coefficient values defined in the benchmarks, are shown as red cross dots.

The model-independent 95\% \CL expected and observed upper limits set on ${\sigma(\PP\to 2\Pa+\PX)\mathcal{B}^2(\Pa\to 2\PGm)\alphaGen}$ over the range $0.21 < \MPa < 9\GeV$ for the combined 2016, 2017, and 2018 analyses. Mass ranges that overlap with \JPsi and \PgU resonances are excluded from the search

The 95\% \CL observed upper limits on the effective coupling $\CahLambda$ of the ALP to the SM Higgs assuming the branching fraction of the ALP to muons is 1 (blue) and 0.1 (orange), for both the expected (dashed) and observed (solid) limits

The 95\% \CL observed upper limits on the effective coupling $\cll/\Lambda$ of the ALP to the SM leptons. The orange shaded region represents the parameter space excluded by this search under three choices of $\CahLambda$ $1\TeV^{-2}$ (solid), $0.1\TeV^{-2}$ (dashed), and $0.01\TeV^{-2}$ (dotted)

The 95\% \CL observed upper limits on $\varepsilon^{2} \mathcal{B}(\ZDark \to \sDark \overline{\sDark}) \mathcal{B}^{2}(\sDark \rightarrow 2\PGm)$ for the vector portal model as a function of the dark scalar mass $\MsDark$ and dark vector boson mass $\MZDark$. The yellow and green bands indicate one and two standard deviation values of the limit, respectively. Because the model-independent limits are calculated only up to a dimuon mass of 60\GeV, the \sDark mass considered for these limits is below 60\GeV

The 95\% \CL observed upper limits for $\sigma(\PP\to\PhOneTwo\to 2\PaOne) \mathcal{B}^2(\PaOne\to 2\PGm)$ for the NMSSM as a function of $\MPaOne$ for $\MPhOneTwo$ = 90~GEV. The data presented here reflect the results of the 2017 and 2018 datasets combined with the previously published results of the 2016 dataset in \cite{CMS:2018jid}

The 95\% \CL observed upper limits for $\sigma(\PP\to\PhOneTwo\to 2\PaOne) \mathcal{B}^2(\PaOne\to 2\PGm)$ for the NMSSM as a function of $\MPaOne$ for $\MPhOneTwo$ = 125~GEV. The data presented here reflect the results of the 2017 and 2018 datasets combined with the previously published results of the 2016 dataset in \cite{CMS:2018jid}

The 95\% \CL observed upper limits for $\sigma(\PP\to\PhOneTwo\to 2\PaOne) \mathcal{B}^2(\PaOne\to 2\PGm)$ for the NMSSM as a function of $\MPaOne$ for $\MPhOneTwo$ = 150~GEV. The data presented here reflect the results of the 2017 and 2018 datasets combined with the previously published results of the 2016 dataset in \cite{CMS:2018jid}

The 95\% \CL observed upper limits (black solid curves) from this search as interpreted in the dark SUSY scenario for the process $\PP \to \Ph \to 2\nOne \to 2\gammaDark + 2\nDark \to 4\PGm + \PX$, with \mbox{$\MnOne = 60\GeV$} and $\MnDark = 1\GeV$. The limits are presented in the plane of $\varepsilon$ and $\MgammaDark$. The color gradient represents different branching fraction assumptions for \mbox{$\mathcal{B}(\Ph \to 2\nOne \to 2\gammaDark + 2\nDark)$}, ranging from dark orange (0.05\%) to light orange (10\%). The degradation of the limit around 1\GeV is attributed to the drop in the dimuon branching fraction $\mathcal{B}(\gammaDark \to 2\mu)$ due to the dimuon resonance of the $\phi$ meson~\cite{Batell:2009yf}