Nuclear modification factors Rcp for $\pi^{+}$ + $\pi^{-}$ and p + $\bar{p}$ in 200 GeV AuAu collisions.

Nuclear modification factors Rcp for $\pi^{+}$ + $\pi^{-}$ and p + $\bar{p}$ in 200 GeV AuAu collisions.

Nuclear modification factors Rcp for $\pi^{+}$ + $\pi^{-}$ and p + $\bar{p}$ in 200 GeV AuAu collisions.

The $\pi^{-}$/$\pi{+}$ and $\bar{p}$/p ratios in 12 $\%$ central, MB Au+Au and d+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s}_{NN}$ = 200 GeV. Errors are statistical and point-to-point systematic.

The p/$\pi^{+}$ and $\bar{p}$/$\pi^{-}$ ratios from d+Au and Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s}_{NN}$ = 200 GeV. The systematic uncertainties for 60-80$\%$ Au+Au collisions are similar.

The ratios of the $Wj$, $W^+j$ and $W^-j$ cross-sections to the $Z^0 j$ cross-section, and the ratio of the $W^+j$ to $W^-j$ cross-sections.

The asymmetry of $W^+j$ and $W^-j$ production, given by $A(Wj)\equiv (\sigma_{W^+j}-\sigma_{W^-j})/(\sigma_{W^+j}+\sigma_{W^-j})$.

The asymmetry of $W^+j$ and $W^-j$ production, given by $A(Wj)\equiv (\sigma_{W^+j}-\sigma_{W^-j})/(\sigma_{W^+j}+\sigma_{W^-j})$.

The measured cross-sections for $Wj$ production in four bins of $\eta^{\mu}$. The uncertainties shown are statistical, systematic and due to the luminosity determination.

The measured cross-sections for $Wj$ production in four bins of $\eta^{\mu}$. The uncertainties shown are statistical, systematic and due to the luminosity determination.

The measured cross-sections for $Wj$ production in four bins of $\eta^{\rm jet}$. The uncertainties shown are statistical, systematic and due to the luminosity determination.

The measured cross-sections for $Wj$ production in four bins of $\eta^{\rm jet}$. The uncertainties shown are statistical, systematic and due to the luminosity determination.

The measured cross-sections for $Wj$ production in five bins of $p^{\rm jet}_T$. The uncertainties shown are statistical, systematic and due to the luminosity determination.

The measured cross-sections for $Wj$ production in five bins of $p^{\rm jet}_T$. The uncertainties shown are statistical, systematic and due to the luminosity determination.

The measured cross-sections for $Zj$ production in four bins of $y^Z$. The uncertainties shown are statistical, systematic and due to the luminosity determination.

The measured cross-sections for $Z^0 j$ production in four bins of $y^Z$. The uncertainties shown are statistical, systematic and due to the luminosity determination.

The measured cross-sections for $Zj$ production in four bins of $\eta^{\rm jet}$. The uncertainties shown are statistical, systematic and due to the luminosity determination.

The measured cross-sections for $Z^0 j$ production in four bins of $\eta^{\rm jet}$. The uncertainties shown are statistical, systematic and due to the luminosity determination.

The measured cross-sections for $Zj$ production in bins of $p^{\rm jet}_T$. The uncertainties shown are statistical, systematic and due to the luminosity determination.

The measured cross-sections for $Z^0 j$ production in bins of $p^{\rm jet}_T$. The uncertainties shown are statistical, systematic and due to the luminosity determination.

The measured cross-sections for $Zj$ production in bins of $|\Delta\phi|$. The uncertainties shown are statistical, systematic and due to the luminosity determination.

The measured cross-sections for $Z^0 j$ production in bins of $|\Delta\phi|$. The uncertainties shown are statistical, systematic and due to the luminosity determination.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $W^+j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 1 in bins of $\eta^{\mu}$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $W^+j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 1 in bins of $\eta^{\mu}$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $W^-j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 1 in bins of $\eta^{\mu}$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $W^-j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 1 in bins of $\eta^{\mu}$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $W^+j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 5 in bins of $\eta^{\rm jet}$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $W^+j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 5 in bins of $\eta^{\rm jet}$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $W^-j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 5 in bins of $\eta^{\rm jet}$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $W^-j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 5 in bins of $\eta^{\rm jet}$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $W^+j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 3 in bins of $p_T^{\rm jet}$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $W^+j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 3 in bins of $p_T^{\rm jet}$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $W^-j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 3 in bins of $p_T^{\rm jet}$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $W^-j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 3 in bins of $p_T^{\rm jet}$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $Zj$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 4 as a function of $y^Z$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $Z^0 j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 4 as a function of $y^Z$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $Zj$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 5 as a function of $\eta^{\rm jet}$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $Z^0 j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 5 as a function of $\eta^{\rm jet}$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $Zj$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 6 as a function of $p_T^{\rm jet}$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $Z^0 j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 6 as a function of $p_T^{\rm jet}$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $Zj$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 7 as a function of $|\Delta\phi|$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $Z^0 j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 7 as a function of $|\Delta\phi|$, where the rows and columns correspond to the individual bins.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $W^+j$ and $W^-j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 1 in bins of $\eta\mu$. The first four rows/columns correspond to the $W^+j$ cross-section in bins of $\eta\mu$ and the second four rows/columns correspond to the $W^-j$ cross-section in bins of $\eta\mu$. The matrix is used to calculate the ratio and asymmetry of $W^+j$ and $W^-j$ production as a function of $\eta\mu$.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $W^+j$ and $W^-j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Table 1 in bins of $\eta^\mu$. The matrix is used to calculate the ratio and asymmetry of $W^+j$ and $W^-j$ production as a function of $\eta^\mu$.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $W^+j$, $W^-j$ and $Zj$ production cross-section measurements presented in Tables 2 and 5 in bins of $\eta^{\rm jet}$. The first four rows/columns correspond to the $W^+j$ cross-section in bins of $\eta^{\rm jet}$, the middle four correspond to the $W^-j$ cross-section in bins of $\eta^{\rm jet}$ and the final four correspond to the $Zj$ cross-section in bins of $\eta^{\rm jet}$. The matrix is used to calculate the ratios of $Wj$ to $Zj$ production and the charge ratio and asymmetry of $Wj$ production in the total fiducial region.

The correlation matrix for the systematic uncertainties on the $W^+j$, $W^-j$ and $Z^0 j$ production cross-section measurements presented in Tables 2 and 5 in bins of $\eta^{\rm jet}$. The matrix is used to calculate the ratios of $Wj$ to $Z^0 j$ production and the charge ratio and asymmetry of $Wj$ production in the total fiducial region.

Inclusive J/$\psi$ $v_2$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in the centrality interval 0$-$50 %

Inclusive J/$\psi$ $v_2$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in the centrality interval 0$-$10 %

Inclusive J/$\psi$ $v_2$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in the centrality interval 30$-$50 %

Inclusive J/$\psi$ $v_3$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in the centrality interval 0$-$10 %

Inclusive J/$\psi$ $v_3$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in the centrality interval 10$-$30 %

Inclusive J/$\psi$ $v_3$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in the centrality interval 30$-$50 %

Inclusive J/$\psi$ $v_3$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in the centrality interval 0$-$50 %

Inclusive J/$\psi$ $v_3/v_2$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in the centrality interval 0$-$50 %

Inclusive J/$\psi$ $v_3/v_2^{3/2}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in the centrality interval 0$-$50 %

Inclusive J/$\psi$ $v_2$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in the centrality interval 20$-$40 %

Inclusive J/$\psi$ $v_2$ as a function of centrality in the $p_{T}$ range 0$-$5 GeV/$c$

Inclusive J/$\psi$ $v_2$ as a function of centrality in the $p_{T}$ range 5$-$20.0 GeV/$c$

Inclusive J/$\psi$ $v_2^{\pi}/v_2^{J/\psi}$ as a function of centrality in the $p_{T}$ range 0$-$5 GeV/$c$

Inclusive J/$\psi$ $v_2^{\pi}/v_2^{J/\psi}$ as a function of centrality in the $p_{T}$ range 5$-$20.0 GeV/$c$

Inclusive J/$\psi$ $v_3$ as a function of centrality in the $p_{T}$ range 0$-$5 GeV/$c$

Inclusive J/$\psi$ $v_3$ as a function of centrality in the $p_{T}$ range 5$-$20.0 GeV/$c$

The expected exclusion limit contours at 95% CL for the $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production in the $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2})$-$m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ plane.

The +1 $\sigma$ expected exclusion limit contours at 95% CL for the $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production in the $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2})$-$m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ plane.

The -1 $\sigma$ expected exclusion limit contours at 95% CL for the $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production in the $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2})$-$m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ plane.

The +1 $\sigma$ observed exclusion limit contours at 95% CL for the $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production in the $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2})$-$m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ plane.

The -1 $\sigma$ observed exclusion limit contours at 95% CL for the $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production in the $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2})$-$m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ plane.

The observed and expected exclusion limit at 95% CL for the $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production in the $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2})$-$m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})$ plane.

Expected and observed 95% CL exclusion upper limits on the higgsino production ($\tilde{\chi}\tilde{\chi} \equiv \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}, \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{\mp}_{1}$) cross-section in the signal of $h \tilde{G} h \tilde{G} $ as a function of the higgsino mass.

The distribution of $S_{E_\mathrm{T}^{\mathrm{miss}}}$ after the selection of diphoton candidates with $120~GeV < m_{\gamma\gamma} < 130~GeV$. Expected distributions are shown for the $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2} \to W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} h \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} $ signal with $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2})=200~GeV$ and $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=0.5~GeV$, and the $h\tilde{G} h\tilde{G}$ signal with $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=150~GeV$ and $m(\tilde{G})=1~MeV$. These overlaid signal points are representative of the model kinematics. The sum in quadrature of the MC statistical and experimental systematic uncertainties in the total background is shown as the hatched bands, while the theoretical uncertainties in the background normalisation are not included. The $t\bar{t}\gamma$ and $t\bar{t}\gamma\gamma$ processes have a negligible contribution and are not represented. Overflow events are included in the rightmost bin. The lower panel shows the ratio of the data to the background.

Acceptance and efficiency for the $W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} h \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ signal in each category.

Acceptance and efficiency for the $h \tilde{G} h \tilde{G}$ signal in each category.

Cut flow for the $W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} h \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ signal sample at $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1} \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2})=200~GeV$, $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=0.5~GeV$, with 260000 entries.

Cut flow for the $h \tilde{G} h \tilde{G}$ signal sample at $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=150~GeV$, $m(\tilde{G})=1~MeV$, with 50000 entries.

Event yields in the range 120 <$m\gamma\gamma$< 130 GeV for data, signal models, the SM Higgs boson background and non-resonant background in each analysis category after the fit.

Event yields in the range 120 <$m\gamma\gamma$< 130 GeV for data, signal models, the SM Higgs boson background and non-resonant background in each analysis category before the fit.

Acceptance for the $W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} h \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ signals in the leptonic channel.

Efficiency for the $W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} h \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ signals in the leptonic channel.

Acceptance for the $W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} h \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ signals in the hadronic channel.

Efficiency for the $W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} h \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ signals in the hadronic channel.

Acceptance for the $W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} h \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ signals in the rest channel.

Efficiency for the $W^{\pm} \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1} h \tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$ signals in the rest channel.

Acceptance for the $h \tilde{G} h \tilde{G}$ signals in the each channel.

Efficiency for the $h \tilde{G} h \tilde{G}$ signals in the each channel.

Observed top-quark mass distribution and expected background in Region A after the fit (Post-Fit) under the background-only hypothesis for the resolved analysis.

Observed top-quark mass distribution and expected background in Region B after the fit (Post-Fit) under the background-only hypothesis for the resolved analysis.

Observed top-quark mass distribution and expected background in Region C after the fit (Post-Fit) under the background-only hypothesis for the resolved analysis.

Observed top-quark mass distribution and expected background in Region D after the fit (Post-Fit) under the background-only hypothesis for the resolved analysis.

Observed top-quark mass distribution and expected background in Region SR1 Medium 1b after the fit (Post-Fit) under the background-only hypothesis for the boosted analysis.

Observed top-quark mass distribution and expected background in Region SR1 Medium 2b after the fit (Post-Fit) under the background-only hypothesis for the boosted analysis.

Observed top-quark mass distribution and expected background in Region SR1 Tight 1b after the fit (Post-Fit) under the background-only hypothesis for the boosted analysis.

Observed top-quark mass distribution and expected background in Region SR1 Tight 2b after the fit (Post-Fit) under the background-only hypothesis for the boosted analysis.

Observed top-quark mass distribution and expected background in Region SR2 Medium 1b after the fit (Post-Fit) under the background-only hypothesis for the boosted analysis.

Observed top-quark mass distribution and expected background in Region SR2 Medium 2b after the fit (Post-Fit) under the background-only hypothesis for the boosted analysis.

Observed top-quark mass distribution and expected background in Region SR2 Tight 1b after the fit (Post-Fit) under the background-only hypothesis for the boosted analysis.

Observed top-quark mass distribution and expected background in Region SR2 Tight 2b after the fit (Post-Fit) under the background-only hypothesis for the boosted analysis.

Expected and observed upper limits on the cross-section times branching fraction of topcolor-assisted-technicolor Z$^{\prime}_{TC2}$ decaying into top-quark pair as a function of the Z$^{\prime}_{TC2}$ mass.

Expected and observed upper limits on the cross-section times branching fraction of A1 axial-vector mediator decaying into top-quark pair as a function of the mediator mass.

Expected and observed upper limits on the cross-section times branching fraction of V1 vector mediator decaying into top-quark pair as a function of the mediator mass.

Expected and observed upper limits on the cross-section times branching fraction of Kaluza-Klein graviton decaying into top-quark pair as a function of the graviton mass.

Expected and observed upper limits on the cross-section times branching fraction of Kaluza-Klein gluon decaying into top-quark pair as a function of the gluon mass.

Expected and observed upper limits on cross-section times branching fraction of Kaluza-Klein gluon decaying into top-quark pair as a function of the width of Kaluza-Klein gluon for masses of 0.5 TeV.

Expected and observed upper limits on cross-section times branching fraction of Kaluza-Klein gluon decaying into top-quark pair as a function of the width of Kaluza-Klein gluon for masses of 1 TeV.

Expected and observed upper limits on cross-section times branching fraction of Kaluza-Klein gluon decaying into top-quark pair as a function of the width of Kaluza-Klein gluon for masses of 1.5 TeV.

Expected upper limits on cross-section times branching fraction of Kaluza-Klein gluon decaying into top-quark pair as a function of the width of Kaluza-Klein gluon for masses of 2 TeV.

Expected upper limits on cross-section times branching fraction of Kaluza-Klein gluon decaying into top-quark pair as a function of the width of Kaluza-Klein gluon for masses of 5 TeV.

Fit results from a fit to data using Eq. 11 to parameterize the femtoscopic correlations and Eq. 15 for non-femtoscopic ones (EMCIC fit from Figure 6 in the paper)

Fit results from a fit to 1D correlation function using Eq. 6 to parameterize the femtoscopic correlations (standard fit from Figure 7 in the paper)

Fit results from a fit to 1D correlation function using Eq. 6 to parameterize the femtoscopic correlations and Eq. 12 for non-femtoscopic ones (delta - q fit from Figure 7 in the paper)

Fit results from a fit to 1D correlation function using Eq. 6 to parameterize the femtoscopic correlations and Eq. 15 for non-femtoscopic ones (EMCIC fit from Figure 7 in the paper). The non-femtoscopic parameters M1−4 were not varied, but kept fixed to the values in Table IV

Multiplicity dependence of fit results to 1D correlation function for different fit parameterizations (Figure 8 in the paper).

Multiplicity dependence of fit parameters to two-dimensional correlation functions using Equations 7 and 8. To consistently compare to previous measurements, Omega was set to unity (c.f. Equation 5).

Data for the number of reconstructed photon conversions as a function of conversion location plots

Corrected photon spectra, pT

Corrected photon spectra, y

Data for the two-photon invariant mass plots

π0 transverse momentum spectra

π0 contribution in the photon spectra spectra

The ratios Anti-Λ/Λ, K+/K-, and Anti-Ξ+/Ξ- as a function of pT

Anti-baryon to baryon ratios measured by STAR

The mid-rapidity kaon multiplicity densities ($dN/dy$) and mT exponential inverse slopes (T in MeV) as a function of negative hadron multiplicity with $|η|<0.5$ ($dNh-/dη$). Quoted errors are uncorrelated errors (first) and correlated systematic errors (second). Systematic error on $dNh-/dη$ is $7\%$.

The mid-rapidity kaon multiplicity densities ($dN/dy$) and mT exponential inverse slopes (T in MeV) as a function of negative hadron multiplicity with $|η|<0.5$ ($dNh-/dη$). Quoted errors are uncorrelated errors (first) and correlated systematic errors (second). Systematic error on $dNh-/dη$ is $7\%$.

Central 0-6% K/π yield ratios.

pbar over p ratio for Heavy Ion and pp collisions

The observed DNN output distribution for data collected in 2016 in the VBF-SB region compared to the post-fit background estimate from SM processes. The predicted backgrounds are obtained from a S+B fit performed across analysis regions and years. The total post-fit and pre-fit uncertainties on the background prediction are also reported.

The observed DNN output distribution for data collected in 2017 in the VBF-SB region compared to the post-fit background estimate from SM processes. The predicted backgrounds are obtained from a S+B fit performed across analysis regions and years. The total post-fit and pre-fit uncertainties on the background prediction are also reported.

The observed DNN output distribution for data collected in 2018 in the VBF-SB region compared to the post-fit background estimate from SM processes. The predicted backgrounds are obtained from a S+B fit performed across analysis regions and years. The total post-fit and pre-fit uncertainties on the background prediction are also reported.

The observed DNN output distribution in the VBF-SB regions for the combination of 2016, 2017, and 2018 data, compared to the post-fit prediction from SM processes. The total post-fit and pre-fit uncertainties on the background prediction are also reported.

The observed DNN output distribution in the VBF-SR region for the combination of 2016, 2017, and 2018 data, compared to the post-fit prediction from SM processes. The post-fit distributions for the Higgs boson signal produced via ggH and VBF modes with mass of 125.38 GeV, along with the total post-fit and pre-fit uncertainties on the background prediction, are also reported.

The observed BDT output distribution compared to the prediction from the simulation of various SM background processes. Dimuon events passing the event selection requirements of the ggH category, with dimuon mass between 110–150 GeV, are considered. The expected distributions for ggH, VBF, and other signal processes are also reported. The background uncertainty is obtained by summing in quadrature the uncertainty due to the limited size of the simulated samples with those arising from experimental and theoretical sources of systematic uncertainty.

Comparison between the data and the total background extracted from a S+B fit performed in the ggH-cat1 subcategory. The one and two standard deviation bands include the uncertainties in the background component of the fit. The best fit signal contribution with mass of 125.38 GeV is also reported.

Comparison between the data and the total background extracted from a S+B fit performed in the ggH-cat2 subcategory. The one and two standard deviation bands include the uncertainties in the background component of the fit. The best fit signal contribution with mass of 125.38 GeV is also reported.

Comparison between the data and the total background extracted from a S+B fit performed in the ggH-cat3 subcategory. The one and two standard deviation bands include the uncertainties in the background component of the fit. The best fit signal contribution with mass of 125.38 GeV is also reported.

Comparison between the data and the total background extracted from a S+B fit performed in the ggH-cat4 subcategory. The one and two standard deviation bands include the uncertainties in the background component of the fit. The best fit signal contribution with mass of 125.38 GeV is also reported.

Comparison between the data and the total background extracted from a S+B fit performed in the ggH-cat5 subcategory. The one and two standard deviation bands include the uncertainties in the background component of the fit. The best fit signal contribution with mass of 125.38 GeV is also reported.

The observed BDT output distribution compared to the prediction from the simulation of various SM background processes. Dimuon events passing the event selection requirements of the ttH hadronic category, with dimuon mass between 110–150 GeV, are considered. The expected distributions from different production modes of the Higgs boson are also reported. The background uncertainty is obtained by summing in quadrature the uncertainty due to the limited size of the simulated samples with those arising from experimental and theoretical sources of systematic uncertainty.

The observed BDT output distribution compared to the prediction from the simulation of various SM background processes. Dimuon events passing the event selection requirements of the ttH leptonic category, with dimuon mass between 110–150 GeV, are considered. The expected distributions from different production modes of the Higgs boson are also reported. The background uncertainty is obtained by summing in quadrature the uncertainty due to the limited size of the simulated samples with those arising from experimental and theoretical sources of systematic uncertainty.

Comparison between the data and the total background extracted from a S+B fit performed in the ttHhad-cat1 subcategory. The one and two standard deviation bands include the uncertainties in the background component of the fit. The best fit signal contribution with mass of 125.38 GeV is also reported.

Comparison between the data and the total background extracted from a S+B fit performed in the ttHhad-cat2 subcategory. The one and two standard deviation bands include the uncertainties in the background component of the fit. The best fit signal contribution with mass of 125.38 GeV is also reported.

Comparison between the data and the total background extracted from a S+B fit performed in the ttHhad-cat3 subcategory. The one and two standard deviation bands include the uncertainties in the background component of the fit. The best fit signal contribution with mass of 125.38 GeV is also reported.

Comparison between the data and the total background extracted from a S+B fit performed in the ttHlep-cat1 subcategory. The one and two standard deviation bands include the uncertainties in the background component of the fit. The best fit signal contribution with mass of 125.38 GeV is also reported.

Comparison between the data and the total background extracted from a S+B fit performed in the ttHlep-cat2 subcategory. The one and two standard deviation bands include the uncertainties in the background component of the fit. The best fit signal contribution with mass of 125.38 GeV is also reported.

The observed BDT output distribution compared to the prediction from the simulation of various SM background processes. Dimuon events passing the event selection requirements of the WH leptonic category, with dimuon mass between 110–150 GeV, are considered. The expected distributions from different production modes of the Higgs boson are also reported. The background uncertainty is obtained by summing in quadrature the uncertainty due to the limited size of the simulated samples with those arising from experimental and theoretical sources of systematic uncertainty.

The observed BDT output distribution compared to the prediction from the simulation of various SM background processes. Dimuon events passing the event selection requirements of the ZH leptonic category, with dimuon mass between 110–150 GeV, are considered. The expected distributions from different production modes of the Higgs boson are also reported. The background uncertainty is obtained by summing in quadrature the uncertainty due to the limited size of the simulated samples with those arising from experimental and theoretical sources of systematic uncertainty.

Comparison between the data and the total background extracted from a S+B fit performed in the WH-cat1 subcategory. The one and two standard deviation bands include the uncertainties in the background component of the fit. The best fit signal contribution with mass of 125.38 GeV is also reported.

Comparison between the data and the total background extracted from a S+B fit performed in the WH-cat2 subcategory. The one and two standard deviation bands include the uncertainties in the background component of the fit. The best fit signal contribution with mass of 125.38 GeV is also reported.

Comparison between the data and the total background extracted from a S+B fit performed in the WH-cat3 subcategory. The one and two standard deviation bands include the uncertainties in the background component of the fit. The best fit signal contribution with mass of 125.38 GeV is also reported.

Comparison between the data and the total background extracted from a S+B fit performed in the ZH-cat1 subcategory. The one and two standard deviation bands include the uncertainties in the background component of the fit. The best fit signal contribution with mass of 125.38 GeV is also reported.

Comparison between the data and the total background extracted from a S+B fit performed in the ZH-cat2 subcategory. The one and two standard deviation bands include the uncertainties in the background component of the fit. The best fit signal contribution with mass of 125.38 GeV is also reported.

Observed local p-values as a function of the Higgs boson mass hypothesis extracted from the combined fit across event categories as well as from each individual production category.

Expected local p-values as a function of the Higgs boson mass hypothesis extracted from the combined fit across event categories as well as from each individual production category. They are calculated using the background-only expectation obtained from the S+B fit and injecting a signal with mass of 125.38 GeV and strenght of one.

Signal strength modifiers measured for a Higgs boson with mass of 125.38 GeV in each production category as well as from the combined fit.

Scan of the profiled likelihood ratio as a function of $\mu_{ggH,t\overline{t}H}$ and $\mu_{VBF,VH}$.

The 68% CL contour for the profiled likelihood scan as a function of $\mu_{ggH,t\overline{t}H}$ and $\mu_{VBF,VH}$.

The 95% CL contour for the profiled likelihood scan as a function of $\mu_{ggH,t\overline{t}H}$ and $\mu_{VBF,VH}$.

The mass distribution for the weighted combination of VBF-SB and VBF-SR events. Each event is weighted proportionally to the S/(S+B) ratio, calculated as a function of the mass-decorrelated DNN output. The total post-fit and pre-fit uncertainties on the background prediction, along with the best fit signal contribution, are also reported.

Comparison between the data and the total background extracted for the S/(S+B) weighted combination of all event categories. The one and two standard deviation bands include the uncertainties in the background component of the fit. The best fit signal contribution with mass of 125.38 GeV is also reported.

Observed and expected local p-values as a function of the Higgs boson mass hypothesis extracted from the combined fit performed on data recorded at centre-of-mass energies of 7, 8, and 13 TeV. The expected p-values are calculated using the background-only expectation obtained from the S+B fit and injecting a signal with mass of 125.38 GeV and strenght of one.

The observed profile likelihood ratio as a function of $\kappa_{\mu}$ for a Higgs boson mass of 125.38 GeV, obtained from a combined fit with Ref.[10] in the resolved $\kappa$-framework. The best fit value for $\kappa_{\mu}$ is 1.07 and the corresponding observed 68% CL interval is $0.85 < \kappa_{\mu} < 1.29$.

The best fit estimates for the reduced coupling modifiers extracted for fermions and weak bosons from the resolved $\kappa$-framework compared to their corresponding prediction from the SM. The error bars represent 68% CL intervals for the measured parameters.

Rapidity distribution for negatively charged pions for four (10% wide) centrality classes.

Rapidity distribution for positively charged pions for four (10% wide) centrality classes.

Pion multiplicity per participating nuclean as a function of centrality given by $<A_{part}>$.

Pion multiplicity per participating nuclean as a function of centrality given by $<A_{part}>$.Original data point for C+C and Ar+KCl has been scaled to be at the beam energi of 1.23AGeV

Center-of-mass polar angle distribution of negatively and positively charged pions. Shown are pions with center-of-mass momenta of 120-800MeV/c

Dependence of the anisotropy parameter $A_{2}$ on the pion momentum in the center-of-mass system for negatively and positively charged pions for centrality classes of 0-10$\%$ and 30-40$\%$.

Mid-rapidity and forward rapidity transverse momentum distribution for charged pion fo rthe 10$\%$most central events.

Dependence of the anisotropy parameter $A_{2}$ on the pion momentum in the center-of-mass system for negatively and positively charged pions for centrality classes of 0-10$\%$ and 30-40$\%$.

Et distribution

NchRec distribution

v_2{2}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{2}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{2}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{2}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{2}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{2}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{2}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{2}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{2}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{2}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{2}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{2}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{4} / v_2{2}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{4} / v_2{2}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{4} / v_2{2}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{4} / v_2{2}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{4} / v_3{2}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{4} / v_3{2}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{4} / v_3{2}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{4} / v_3{2}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{4} / v_4{2}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{4} / v_4{2}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{4} / v_4{2}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{4} / v_4{2}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{6}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{6}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{6}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{6}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{6}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{6}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{6}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{6}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{6}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{6}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{6}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{6}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6} / v_2{4}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6} / v_2{4}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6} / v_2{4}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6} / v_2{4}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

c_1{4}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

c_1{4}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

c_1{4}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

c_1{4}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

c_1{4}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

c_1{4}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

c_1{4}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

c_1{4}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_1{4}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_1{4}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_1{4}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_1{4}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{2, Nch}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{2, Nch}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{2, Nch}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{2, Nch}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{2, Nch}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{2, Nch}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{2, Nch}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{2, Nch}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{2, Nch}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{2, Nch}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{2, Nch}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{2, Nch}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{2, Nch} / v_2{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{2, Nch} / v_2{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{2, Nch} / v_3{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{2, Nch} / v_3{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{2, Nch} / v_4{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{2, Nch} / v_4{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{2, Nch} / v_2{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{2, Nch} / v_2{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{2, Nch} / v_3{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{2, Nch} / v_3{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{2, Nch} / v_4{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{2, Nch} / v_4{2, Et}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4, Et}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4, Et}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4, Et}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4, Et}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4, Et}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4, Et}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4, Et}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4, Et}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4, Et}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4, Nch}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4, Nch}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4, Nch}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4, Nch}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4, Nch}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4, Nch}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4, Nch}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4, Nch}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4, Nch}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{4, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_3{4, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_4{4, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{6, Et}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{6, Et}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{6, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{6, Et}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{6, Nch}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{6, Nch}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{6, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{6, Nch}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{6, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nc_2{6, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6, Et} / v_2{4, Et}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6, Et} / v_2{4, Et}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6, Et} / v_2{4, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6, Et} / v_2{4, Et}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6, Nch} / v_2{4, Nch}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6, Nch} / v_2{4, Nch}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6, Nch} / v_2{4, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6, Nch} / v_2{4, Nch}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4, Et}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4, Et}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4, Et}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4, Et}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4, Et}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4, Et}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3, Et}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3, Et}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3, Et}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4, Nch}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4, Nch}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4, Nch}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4, Nch}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4, Nch}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4, Nch}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3, Nch}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3, Nch}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3, Nch}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_3{4, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nsc_2_4{4, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

nac_2{3, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{4}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{4}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{4}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{4}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{4, Et}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{4, Et}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{4, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{4, Et}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{4, Nch}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{4, Nch}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{4, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{4, Nch}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{4}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{4}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{4}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{4}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{4, Et}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{4, Et}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{4, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{4, Et}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{4, Nch}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{4, Nch}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{4, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_3{4, Nch}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{4}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{4}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{4}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{4}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{4, Et}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{4, Et}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{4, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{4, Et}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{4, Nch}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{4, Nch}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{4, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_4{4, Nch}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6, Et}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6, Et}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6, Et}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6, Et}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6, Nch}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6, Nch}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6, Nch}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

v_2{6, Nch}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

sc_2_3{4}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

sc_2_3{4}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

sc_2_3{4}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

sc_2_3{4}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

sc_2_3{4}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

sc_2_3{4}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

sc_2_3{4}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

sc_2_3{4}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

sc_2_4{4}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

sc_2_4{4}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

sc_2_4{4}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

sc_2_4{4}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

sc_2_4{4}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

sc_2_4{4}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

sc_2_4{4}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

sc_2_4{4}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

ac_2{3}, standard, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

ac_2{3}, standard, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

ac_2{3}, standard, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

ac_2{3}, standard, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

ac_2{3}, 3-subevent, 0.5<pT<5.0 GeV

ac_2{3}, 3-subevent, 1.0<pT<5.0 GeV

ac_2{3}, 3-subevent, 1.5<pT<5.0 GeV

ac_2{3}, 3-subevent, 2.0<pT<5.0 GeV

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy $v_2$, $v_3$, and $v_4$ vs $p_T$ in 30-40% central Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The mean $<p_T>$ in each $p_T$ bins used for the $v_n$ measurement is shown in Fig.2.6.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy $v_2$, $v_3$, and $v_4$ vs $p_T$ in 40-50% central Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The mean $<p_T>$ in each $p_T$ bins used for the $v_n$ measurement is shown in Fig.2.6.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy $v_2$, and $v_3$ vs $p_T$ in 50-60% central Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The mean $<p_T>$ in each $p_T$ bins used for the $v_n$ measurement is shown in Fig.2.6.

Charged hadron mean $<p_T>$ in each $p_T$ bins used for the $v_n$ measurements in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy $v_2$ and $v_3$ vs centrality in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The corresponding Npart value to each centrality is shown in Fig.3.2.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy $v_4$ vs centrality in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The corresponding Npart value to each centrality is shown in Fig.3.2.

Npart in each centrality bin in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV.

The azimuthal dependence $R_{out}^2$ as function of $\Phi_{pair} - \Psi_{\mathrm{EP,3}}$ for the centrality 20-30% and different kT.

The azimuthal dependence $R_{side}^2$ as function of $\Phi_{pair} - \Psi_{\mathrm{EP,3}}$ for the centrality 20-30% and different kT.

The azimuthal dependence $R_{side}^2$ as function of $\Phi_{pair} - \Psi_{\mathrm{EP,3}}$ for the centrality 20-30% and different kT.

The azimuthal dependence $R_{side}^2$ as function of $\Phi_{pair} - \Psi_{\mathrm{EP,3}}$ for the centrality 20-30% and different kT.

The azimuthal dependence $R_{side}^2$ as function of $\Phi_{pair} - \Psi_{\mathrm{EP,3}}$ for the centrality 20-30% and different kT.

The azimuthal dependence $R_{long}^2$ as function of $\Phi_{pair} - \Psi_{\mathrm{EP,3}}$ for the centrality 20-30% and different kT.

The azimuthal dependence $R_{long}^2$ as function of $\Phi_{pair} - \Psi_{\mathrm{EP,3}}$ for the centrality 20-30% and different kT.

The azimuthal dependence $R_{long}^2$ as function of $\Phi_{pair} - \Psi_{\mathrm{EP,3}}$ for the centrality 20-30% and different kT.

The azimuthal dependence $R_{long}^2$ as function of $\Phi_{pair} - \Psi_{\mathrm{EP,3}}$ for the centrality 20-30% and different kT.

Amplitudes of the radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the relative radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the relative radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the relative radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the relative radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the relative radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the relative radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the relative radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the relative radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the relative radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the relative radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the relative radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

Amplitudes of the relative radii oscillations as function of centrality percentile for four different $k_{\mathrm{T}}$.

The relative amplitudes of the radius oscillations dependence on the third-order anisotropies in space and transverse flow for kT = 0.6 GeV/c.

The relative amplitudes of the radius oscillations dependence on the third-order anisotropies in space and transverse flow for kT = 0.6 GeV/c.

Blast-Wave model source parameters, final source anisotropy ($a_{3}$) and transverse flow ($\rho_{3}$);, for different centrality ranges, as obtained from the fit to ALICE radii oscillation parameters.

Blast-Wave model source parameters, final source anisotropy ($a_{3}$) and transverse flow ($\rho_{3}$);, for different centrality ranges, as obtained from the fit to ALICE radii oscillation parameters.

Blast-Wave model source parameters, final source anisotropy ($a_{3}$) and transverse flow ($\rho_{3}$);, for different centrality ranges, as obtained from the fit to ALICE radii oscillation parameters.

Blast-Wave model source parameters, final source anisotropy ($a_{3}$) and transverse flow ($\rho_{3}$);, for different centrality ranges, as obtained from the fit to ALICE radii oscillation parameters.

Blast-Wave model source parameters, final source anisotropy ($a_{3}$) and transverse flow ($\rho_{3}$), for different centrality ranges, as obtained from the fit to ALICE radii oscillation parameters.

Blast-Wave model source parameters, final source anisotropy ($a_{3}$) and transverse flow ($\rho_{3}$), for different centrality ranges, as obtained from the fit to ALICE radii oscillation parameters.

Numerical values of double-differential yields $d^{2}n/dydp_{T}$ presented in Fig. 10, given in units of $10^{−3} (GeV/c)^{−1}$. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic

Numerical values of double-differential yields $1/m_T d^{2}n/dm_{T}dy$ given in units of $10^{−3}(GeV)^{−2}$ and presented in Fig. 11; the values of $m_T−m_0$ specify the bin centers. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic

Numerical values of double-differential yields $1/m_T d^{2}n/dm_{T}dy$ given in units of $10^{−3}(GeV)^{−2}$ and presented in Fig. 11; the values of $m_T−m_0$ specify the bin centers. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic

Numerical values of double-differential yields $1/m_T d^{2}n/dm_{T}dy$ given in units of $10^{−3}(GeV)^{−2}$ and presented in Fig. 11; the values of $m_T−m_0$ specify the bin centers. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic

Numerical values of the $p_T$-integrated and extrapolated $dn/dy$ distribution presented in Fig. 12. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic. Additionally, the width of the Gaussian fit to the $dn/dy$ distribution, as well as the mean multiplicity of $K^{*}(892)^0$ mesons are shown (see the text for details)

The mean multiplicities $\langle K^{*}(892)^0\rangle$ and the widths of the rapidity distributions $\sigma_y$ obtained from $dn/dy$ distributions (see the text for details). The first uncertainty is statistical and the second systematic

The mean multiplicity of $K^{*}(892)^0$ mesons for 158 GeV/$c$ inelastic p+p interactions compared to theoretical multiplicities obtained within Hadron Gas Models

The mean multiplicities of different particle species measured in nucleus-nucleus collisions at 158$A$ GeV/$c$ by NA49 and NA61/SHINE. The total uncertainties of $\langle K^{*}(892)^0\rangle$, $\langle K^{+}\rangle$ and $\langle K^{-}\rangle$ were taken as the square roots of the sums of squares of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For NA49 p+p data, the $\langle K^{+}\rangle$ and $\langle K^{-}\rangle$ results include statistical uncertainties only($\langle K^{+}\rangle$ =0.2267$\pm$0.0006 and $\langle K^{-}\rangle$=0.1303$\pm$0.0004), whereas systematic uncertainties for total yields were not reported. Therefore, NA61/SHINE $\langle K^{+}\rangle$ and $\langle K^{-}\rangle$ values were used in the $\langle K^{*}(892)^0 \rangle / \langle K^{+} \rangle$ and $\langle K^{*}(892)^{0}\rangle / \langle K^{-} \rangle$ ratios. The numbers of $\langle K^{+} \rangle$ and $\langle K^{−}\rangle$ and their uncertainties for the 5% most central Pb+Pb collisions were multiplied by a factor 262/362 in orderto estimate charged kaon multiplicities in the 23.5% most central Pb+Pb reactions

$v_3$for 0-5% central p+Au collisions

$v_3$for 0-5% central d+Au collisions

$v_3$for 0-5% central $^3$He+Au collisions

Second order and third order flow for pAu collisions from SONIC model in 0-5 central collisions

Second order and third order flow for pAu collisions from iEBE-VISHNU model in 0-5 central collisions

Second order and third order flow for pAu collisions from MSTV model in 0-5 central collisions

Second order and third order flow for dAu collisions from SONIC model in 0-5 central collisions

Second order and third order flow for dAu collisions from iEBE-VISHNU in 0-5 central collisions

Second order and third order flow for dAu collisions from MSTV model in 0-5 central collisions

Second order and third order flow for 3HeAu collisions from SONIC model in 0-5 central collisions

Second order and third order flow for 3HeAu collisions from iEBE-VISHNU in 0-5 central collisions

Second order and third order flow for 3HeAu collisions from MSTV model in 0-5 central collisions

Second order flow for pAu collisions 20-40 centrality bins

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{33}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_7\{\Psi_{223}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_4\{\Psi_{22}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_5\{\Psi_{23}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{222}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{33}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_7\{\Psi_{223}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_4\{\Psi_{22}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_5\{\Psi_{23}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{222}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{33}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_7\{\Psi_{223}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_4\{\Psi_{22}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_5\{\Psi_{23}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{222}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{33}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_7\{\Psi_{223}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

The overall flow harmonic $v_4\{\Psi_{4}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

The overall flow harmonic $v_5\{\Psi_{5}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

The overall flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{6}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

The overall flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{6}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

The overall flow harmonic $v_7\{\Psi_{7}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

The overall flow harmonic $v_4\{\Psi_{4}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

The overall flow harmonic $v_5\{\Psi_{5}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

The overall flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{6}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

The overall flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{6}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

The overall flow harmonic $v_7\{\Psi_{7}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_4\{\Psi_{22}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_5\{\Psi_{23}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{222}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{33}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_7\{\Psi_{223}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_4\{\Psi_{22}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_5\{\Psi_{23}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{222}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{33}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_7\{\Psi_{223}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{422}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{523}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{6222}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{633}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{7223}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{422}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{523}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{6222}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{633}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{7223}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{422}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{523}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{6222}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{633}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{7223}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 0-20% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{422}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{523}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{6222}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{633}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{7223}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of PT in the 20-60% centrality range.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_4\{\Psi_{22}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_5\{\Psi_{23}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{222}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{33}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_7\{\Psi_{223}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_4\{\Psi_{22}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of centrality.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_5\{\Psi_{23}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of centrality.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{222}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of centrality.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_6\{\Psi_{33}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of centrality.

Mixed higher-order flow harmonic $v_7\{\Psi_{223}\}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{422}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{523}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{6222}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{633}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{7223}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{422}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{523}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{6222}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{633}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{7223}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{422}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{523}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{6222}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{633}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{7223}$ from the scalar-product method at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{422}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{523}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{6222}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{633}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of centrality.

Nonlinear response coefficient $\chi_{7223}$ from the scalar-product method at 2.76 TeV as a function of centrality.

Differential cross section measurement.

Antiproton fit parameters and yields. Systematic errors are 10%.

v2 as a function of pT for Pb-Pb collisions at \sqrt{s_NN} = 5.02 TeV and centrality 20-30%.

v2 as a function of pT for Pb-Pb collisions at \sqrt{s_NN} = 5.02 TeV and centrality 30-40%.

v2 as a function of pT for Pb-Pb collisions at \sqrt{s_NN} = 5.02 TeV and centrality 40-50%.

v2 as a function of pT for Pb-Pb collisions at \sqrt{s_NN} = 5.02 TeV and centrality 50-60%.

v2 as a function of pT for Pb-Pb collisions at \sqrt{s_NN} = 5.02 TeV and centrality 60-70%.

v3 as a function of pT for Pb-Pb collisions at \sqrt{s_NN} = 5.02 TeV and centrality 0-20%.

v3 as a function of pT for Pb-Pb collisions at \sqrt{s_NN} = 5.02 TeV and centrality 20-40%.

v3 as a function of pT for Pb-Pb collisions at \sqrt{s_NN} = 5.02 TeV and centrality 40-60%.

Data from Figure 6 – Selection efficiency as a function of $E_\nu$.

Spectrum prediction for ILL's High Flux Reactor, given in 50keV-wide $E_\nu$ bins (centers ranging from 1.8 to 10 MeV). Huber's $^{235}$U prediction in [2 MeV, 8 MeV] is taken from Phys. Rev. C 84 024617 (2011); exponential extrapolations are performed as described in Phys. Rev. Lett. 125 201801 (2020). Relative corrections from Off-equilibrium and Activation are included to obtain the total HFR's spectrum. The IBD cross section we used is based on Strumia-Vissani Phys. Lett. B, 564 42–54 (2003). The IBD yield is simply HFR's spectrum $\times$ IBD cross section. More details can be found in Section 5, where all notations are also introduced.

Data from Figure 14 - STEREO pure-$^{235}$U unfolded spectrum. Error bars are square-roots of diagonal coefficients of the covariance matrix, and include statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Covariance matrix of the unfolded $^{235}$U spectrum, including statistical and systematic uncertainties. It is denoted $V_\Phi$ in Section 8.

(Color Online) Variation of $N_{ch}$ normalized to the number of collisions in the FTPC coverage $(2.9 \leq \eta \leq 3.9)$ and $N_{\gamma}$ normalized to number of collisions, in the PMD coverage $(2.3 \leq \eta \leq 3.7)$ as a function of $N_{coll}$. The lower band shows the uncertainty in the ratio due to uncertainties in $N_{coll}$ calculations.

(Color Online) $dN/d\eta$ for charged particles and photons for Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV for various event centrality classes.

(Color Online) $dN/d\eta$ for charged particles and photons for Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV for various event centrality classes.

(Color Online) Half width at half maximum of the pseudorapidity distributions ($\eta_{h}$) of charged particles as a function of total charged particle multiplicity ($N_{T}$) normalized to the center of mass energy. The Au + Au collision data are from the PHOBOS [8] experiment and p + p collision data are from the ISR [31] experiments.

(Color Online) Half width at half maximum of the pseudorapidity distributions ($\eta_{h}$) of charged particles as a function of total charged particle multiplicity ($N_{T}$) normalized to the center of mass energy. The Au + Au collision data are from the PHOBOS [8] experiment and p + p collision data are from the ISR [31] experiments.

(Color Online) Variation of $dN_{ch}/d\eta$ normalized to $N_{part}$ with $\eta – y_{beam}$ for central and peripheral collisions for positively charged hadrons ($h^{+}$) and negatively charged hadrons ($h^{−}$).

(Color Online) The top panel shows the variation of pion rapidity density normalized to $N_{part}$ with $y – y_{beam}$ for central collisions at various collision energies. Also shown is the estimated $dN_{\pi^{0}}/dy$ obtained from $dN\_{\gamma}/dy$ normalized to $N_{part}$. The bottom panel shows the variation of net proton rapidity density normalized to $N_{part}$ with $y – y_{beam}$ for central collisions at various collision energies.

(Color Online) The top panel shows the variation of pion rapidity density normalized to $N_{part}$ with $y – y_{beam}$ for central collisions at various collision energies. Also shown is the estimated $dN_{\pi^{0}}/dy$ obtained from $dN\_{\gamma}/dy$ normalized to $N_{part}$. The bottom panel shows the variation of net proton rapidity density normalized to $N_{part}$ with $y – y_{beam}$ for central collisions at various collision energies.