Showing 10 of 13 results
A search for a heavy CP-odd Higgs boson, $A$, decaying into a $Z$ boson and a heavy CP-even Higgs boson, $H$, is presented. It uses the full LHC Run 2 dataset of $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV collected with the ATLAS detector, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of $140$ fb$^{-1}$. The search for $A\to ZH$ is performed in the $\ell^+\ell^- t\bar{t}$ and $\nu\bar{\nu}b\bar{b}$ final states and surpasses the reach of previous searches in different final states in the region with $m_H>350$ GeV and $m_A>800$ GeV. No significant deviation from the Standard Model expectation is found. Upper limits are placed on the production cross-section times the decay branching ratios. Limits with less model dependence are also presented as functions of the reconstructed $m(t\bar{t})$ and $m(b\bar{b})$ distributions in the $\ell^+\ell^- t\bar{t}$ and $\nu\bar{\nu}b\bar{b}$ channels, respectively. In addition, the results are interpreted in the context of two-Higgs-doublet models.
The distribution of the fit discriminant m(lltt)-m(tt) in the signal region of the lltt channel for the mH=450 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 2 b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=300 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 3+ b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=300 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The m(tt) distribution in the Lhi3_Zin region of the lltt channel. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The m(bb) distribution in the 2 b-tag 0L region of the vvbb channel. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The m(bb) distribution in the 3+ b-tag 0L region of the vvbb channel. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on sigma(gg->A)*B(A->ZH)*B(H->tt) in the (mA,mH) plane. The limits are shown for tanbeta=1. The tanbeta value is relevant only for the choice of the A boson width. <br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on sigma(bbA)*B(A->ZH)*B(H->tt)$ in the (mA,mH) plane. The limits are shown for tanbeta=10. The tanbeta value is relevant only for the choice of the A boson width. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on sigma(gg->A)*B(A->ZH)*B(H->bb) in the (mA,mH) plane. The limits are shown for tanbeta=1. The tanbeta value is relevant only for the choice of the A boson width. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on sigma(bbA)*B(A->ZH)*B(H->bb) in the (mA,mH) plane. The limits are shown for tanbeta=10. The tanbeta value is relevant only for the choice of the A boson width. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on sigma(gg->A)*B(A->ZH)*B(H->tt) in he (mA,mH) plane. The limits are shown for tanbeta=0.5. The tanbeta value is relevant only for the choice of the A boson width. <br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on sigma(gg->A)*B(A->ZH)*B(H->tt) in the (mA,mH) plane. The limits are shown for tanbeta=5. The tanbeta value is relevant only for the choice of the A boson width. <br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on sigma(bbA)*B(A->ZH)*B(H->tt) in the (mA,mH) plane. The limits are shown for tanbeta=1. The tanbeta value is relevant only for the choice of the A boson width. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on sigma(bbA)*B(A->ZH)*B(H->tt)$ in the (mA,mH) plane. The limits are shown for tanbeta=5. The tanbeta value is relevant only for the choice of the A boson width. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on sigma(gg->A)*B(A->ZH)*B(H->bb) in the (mA,mH) plane. The limits are shown for tanbeta=0.5. The tanbeta value is relevant only for the choice of the A boson width. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on sigma(gg->A)*B(A->ZH)*B(H->bb) in the (mA,mH) plane. The limits are shown for tanbeta=5. The tanbeta value is relevant only for the choice of the A boson width. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on sigma(bbA)*B(A->ZH)*B(H->bb) in the (mA,mH) plane. The limits are shown for tanbeta=1. The tanbeta value is relevant only for the choice of the A boson width. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on sigma(bbA)*B(A->ZH)*B(H->bb) in the (mA,mH) plane. The limits are shown for tanbeta=5. The tanbeta value is relevant only for the choice of the A boson width. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on sigma(bbA)*B(A->ZH)*B(H->bb) in the (mA,mH) plane. The limits are shown for tanbeta=20. The tanbeta value is relevant only for the choice of the A boson width. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant m(lltt)-m(tt) in the signal region of the lltt channel for the mH=450 GeV hypothesis with the bbA signal shown for comparison. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The m(tt) distribution in the L3hi_Zin region of the lltt channel for the mH=450 GeV hypothesis with the bbA signal shown for comparison. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant m(lltt)-m(tt) in the signal region of the lltt channel for the mH=350 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant m(lltt)-m(tt) in the signal region of the lltt channel for the mH=400 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant m(lltt)-m(tt) in the signal region of the lltt channel for the mH=500 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant m(lltt)-m(tt) in the signal region of the lltt channel for the mH=550 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant m(lltt)-m(tt) in the signal region of the lltt channel for the mH=600 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant m(lltt)-m(tt) in the signal region of the lltt channel for the mH=700 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant m(lltt)-m(tt) in the signal region of the lltt channel for the mH=800 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 2 b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=130 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 2 b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=150 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 2 b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=200 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 2 b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=250 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 2 b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=350 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 2 b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=400 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 2 b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=450 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 2 b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=500 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 2 b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=600 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 2 b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=700 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 2 b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=800 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH i+ the 3p b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=130 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 3+ b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=150 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 3+ b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=200 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 3+ b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=250 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 3+ b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=350 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 3+ b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=400 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 3+ b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=450 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 3+ b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=500 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 3+ b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=600 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 3+ b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=700 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 3+ b-tag signal region of the vvbb channel for the mH=800 GeV hypothesis. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 2 b-tag 2L region of the vvbb channel. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 2 b-tag em region of the vvbb channel. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 3+ b-tag 2L region of the vvbb channel. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The distribution of the fit discriminant mTVH in the 3+ b-tag em region of the vvbb channel. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Local significance for lltt ggF signals for tanbeta=1. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Local significance for lltt bbA signals for tanbeta=20. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Local significance for vvbb ggF signals for tanbeta=1. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Local significance for vvbb bbA signals for tanbeta=20. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Signal acceptance times efficiency for lltt ggF signals. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Signal acceptance times efficiency for lltt bbA signals. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Signal acceptance times efficiency for vvbb ggF signals. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
Signal acceptance times efficiency for vvbb bbA signals. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The pT distribution of the third lepton in the L3hi_Zin region of the lltt channel. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The eta distribution of the H boson candidate in the rest frame of the A boson candidate in the L3hi_Zin region of the lltt channel. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The ETmiss distribution in the 2 b-tag 0L region of the vvbb channel. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The m_top_near distribution in the 2 b-tag 0L region of the vvbb channel. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The ETmiss distribution in the 3+ b-tag 0L region of the vvbb channel. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
The m_top_near distribution in the 3+ b-tag 0L region of the vvbb channel. <br><br><a href="?table=overview">return to overview</a>
A search for supersymmetry targeting the direct production of winos and higgsinos is conducted in final states with either two leptons ($e$ or $\mu$) with the same electric charge, or three leptons. The analysis uses 139 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collision data at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV collected with the ATLAS detector during Run 2 of the Large Hadron Collider. No significant excess over the Standard Model expectation is observed. Simplified and complete models with and without $R$-parity conservation are considered. In topologies with intermediate states including either $Wh$ or $WZ$ pairs, wino masses up to 525 GeV and 250 GeV are excluded, respectively, for a bino of vanishing mass. Higgsino masses smaller than 440 GeV are excluded in a natural $R$-parity-violating model with bilinear terms. Upper limits on the production cross section of generic events beyond the Standard Model as low as 40 ab are obtained in signal regions optimised for these models and also for an $R$-parity-violating scenario with baryon-number-violating higgsino decays into top quarks and jets. The analysis significantly improves sensitivity to supersymmetric models and other processes beyond the Standard Model that may contribute to the considered final states.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 13(b) and Fig 8(aux).
positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 13(b) and Fig 8(aux).
negative $\sigma$ variation of observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 13(b) and Fig 8(aux).
Observed excluded cross-section at 95% CL for the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 8(aux).
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL for the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the Wh-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from from Fig 13(a) and from Fig 7 and Fig 10(aux).
Observed excluded cross-section at 95% CL for the Wh-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 7(aux) and Fig 10(aux).
positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the Wh-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from from Fig 13(a) and from Fig 7 and Fig 10(aux).
negative one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the Wh-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from from Fig 13(a) and from Fig 7 and Fig 10(aux).
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL for the Wh-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL for the Wh-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL for the Wh-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region $SR^{bRPV}_{2l-SS}$. in a susy scenario where $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are produced in pairs and decay to all possible allowed bRPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV, tan$\beta$=5. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region $SR^{bRPV}_{3l}$. in a susy scenario where $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are produced in pairs and decay to all possible allowed bRPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV, tan$\beta$=5. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region $SR^{WZ}_{high-m_{T2}}$. The wino-like doublet pair ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$) were produced and then decays into $bino-like \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}$ which is the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) accompanied by mass on-shell or mass off-shell W and Z bosons. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 150 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1})$ = 50 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region $SR^{WZ}_{low-m_{T2}}$. The wino-like doublet pair ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$) were produced and then decays into $bino-like \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}$ which is the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) accompanied by mass on-shell or mass off-shell W and Z bosons. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 150 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1})$ = 50 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the low mass $SR^{RPV}_{2l1b}$, where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the medium mass $SR^{RPV}_{2l1b}$, where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the low mass $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}$, where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the medium mass $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}$, where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the high mass $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}$, where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the low mass $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}$, where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the medium mass $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}$, where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the high mass $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}$, where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the $SR^{Wh}_{low-m_{T2} }$. The wino-like doublet pair ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$) were produced and then decays into $bino-like \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}$ which is the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) accompanied by mass on-shell or mass off-shell W and Higgs bosons. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 300 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1})$ = 100 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the $SR^{Wh}_{high-m_{T2} }$. The wino-like doublet pair ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$) were produced and then decays into $bino-like \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}$ which is the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) accompanied by mass on-shell or mass off-shell W and Higgs bosons. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 300 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1})$ = 100 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Signal Hepdataeptance for $SR^{bRPV}_{2l-SS}$ signal region from Fig 13(a)(aux) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are produced in pairs and decay to all possible allowed bRPV decays.
Signal Hepdataeptance for $SR^{bRPV}_{3l}$ signal region from Fig 13(b)(aux) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are produced in pairs and decay to all possible allowed bRPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{WZ}_{high-m_{T2}}$ in a SUSY scenario where the wino-like doublet pair ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$) were produced and then decays into $bino-like \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}$ which is the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) accompanied by mass on-shell or mass off-shell W and Z bosons.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{WZ}_{low-m_{T2}}$ in a SUSY scenario where the wino-like doublet pair ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$) were produced and then decays into $bino-like \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}$ which is the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) accompanied by mass on-shell or mass off-shell W and Z bosons.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{RPV}_{2l1b}-L$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{RPV}_{2l1b}-M$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}-L$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}-M$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}-H$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}-L$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}-M$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}-H$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{bRPV}_{2l-SS}$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are produced in pairs and decay to all possible allowed bRPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{bRPV}_{3l}$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are produced in pairs and decay to all possible allowed bRPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{WZ}_{high-m_{T2}}$ in a SUSY scenario where the wino-like doublet pair ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$) were produced and then decays into $bino-like \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}$ which is the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) accompanied by mass on-shell or mass off-shell W and Z bosons.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{WZ}_{low-m_{T2}}$ in a SUSY scenario where the wino-like doublet pair ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$) were produced and then decays into $bino-like \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}$ which is the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) accompanied by mass on-shell or mass off-shell W and Z bosons.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{RPV}_{2l1b}-L$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{RPV}_{2l1b}-M$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}-L$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}-M$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}-H$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}-L$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}-M$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}-H$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{Wh}_{high-m_{T2} }$ signal region from Fig 11(a)(aux) in a SUSY scenario where direct production of a lightest $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ , decay with 100% branching ratio to a final state with a same sign light lepton (e or $\mu$) pair and two lightest neutralino1, via the on-shell emission of SM W and Higgs bosons,
Signal acceptance for $SR^{Wh}_{low-m_{T2} }$ signal region from Fig 11(b)(aux) in a SUSY scenario where direct production of a lightest $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ , decay with 100% branching ratio to a final state with a same sign light lepton (e or $\mu$) pair and two lightest neutralino1, via the on-shell emission of SM W and Higgs bosons,
Signal efficiency for $SR^{Wh}_{high-m_{T2} }$ signal region from Fig 15(a)(aux) in a SUSY scenario where direct production of a lightest $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ , decay with 100% branching ratio to a final state with a same sign light lepton (e or $\mu$) pair and two lightest neutralino1, via the on-shell emission of SM W and Higgs bosons,
Signal efficiency for $SR^{Wh}_{low-m_{T2} }$ signal region from Fig 15(b)(aux) in a SUSY scenario where direct production of a lightest $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ , decay with 100% branching ratio to a final state with a same sign light lepton (e or $\mu$) pair and two lightest neutralino1, via the on-shell emission of SM W and Higgs bosons,
Observed 95% X-section upper limits as a function of higgsino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ mass in the bilinear RPV model from Fig 14.
Observed 95% X-section upper limits as a function of higgsino $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ mass in the UDD RPV model from Fig 18.
Observed 95% X-section upper limits as a function of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ mass in the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 9(aux).
N-1 distributions for $m_{T2}$ of observed data and expected background towards $SR^{WZ}_{high-m_{T2}}$ from publication's Figure 11(a) . The last bin is inclusive.
N-1 distributions for $m_{T2}$ of observed data and expected background towards $SR^{WZ}_{low-m_{T2}}$ from publication's Figure 11(b) . The last bin is inclusive.
N-1 distributions for $m_{T2}$ of observed data and expected background towards $SR^{bRPV}_{2l-SS}$ from publication's Figure 11(c) . The last bin is inclusive.
N-1 distributions for $m_{T2}$ of observed data and expected background towards $SR^{bRPV}_{3l}$ from publication's Figure 11(d) . The last bin is inclusive.
N-1 distributions for $\sum p^{b-jet}_{T}/\sum p^{jet}_{T}$ of observed data and expected background towards $SR^{RPV}_{2l1b}-L$ from publication's Figure 16(a) . The last bin is inclusive.
N-1 distributions for $\sum p^{b-jet}_{T}/\sum p^{jet}_{T}$ of observed data and expected background towards $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}-M$ from publication's Figure 16(b) . The last bin is inclusive.
N-1 distributions for $\sum p^{b-jet}_{T}/\sum p^{jet}_{T}$ of observed data and expected background towards $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}-H$ from publication's Figure 16(c) . The last bin is inclusive.
N-1 distribution for $E_{T}^{miss}$ in $SR^{Wh}_{high-m_{T2} }$ in ee channel
N-1 distribution for $E_{T}^{miss}$ in $SR^{Wh}_{high-m_{T2} }$ in e$\mu$ channel
N-1 distribution for $E_{T}^{miss}$ in $SR^{Wh}_{high-m_{T2} }$ in $\mu\mu$ channel
N-1 distribution for $\mathcal{S}(E_{T}^{miss})$ in $SR^{Wh}_{low-m_{T2} }$ in ee channel
N-1 distribution for $\mathcal{S}(E_{T}^{miss})$ in $SR^{Wh}_{low-m_{T2} }$ in e$\mu$ channel
N-1 distribution for $\mathcal{S}(E_{T}^{miss})$ in $SR^{Wh}_{low-m_{T2} }$ in $\mu\mu$ channel
A search for a new massive charged gauge boson, $W'$, is performed with the ATLAS detector at the LHC. The dataset used in this analysis was collected from proton-proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s} =13$ TeV, and corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The reconstructed $tb$ invariant mass is used to search for a $W'$ boson decaying into a top quark and a bottom quark. The result is interpreted in terms of a $W'$ boson with purely right-handed or left-handed chirality in a mass range of 0.5-6 TeV. Different values for the coupling of the $W'$ boson to the top and bottom quarks are considered, taking into account interference with single-top-quark production in the $s$-channel. No significant deviation from the background prediction is observed. The results are expressed as upper limits on the $W' \rightarrow tb$ production cross-section times branching ratio as a function of the $W'$-boson mass and in the plane of the coupling vs the $W'$-boson mass.
Distribution (events/100 GeV) of the reconstructed $m_{tb}$ for data and backgrounds in the 0-lepton channel's signal region 1 after the background-only fit to data. The systematics uncertainty is shown for the post-fit background sum, including the background statistical uncertainty. The individual background components are obtained after the fit, too. There are also the pre-fit background sum and the expected signal distribution. The distribution of the $W^{\prime}$ boson signal for a mass of 3 TeV is normalised to the predicted cross-section. The last bin in each distribution includes overflow.
Distribution (events/100 GeV) of the reconstructed $m_{tb}$ for data and backgrounds in the 0-lepton channel's signal region 2 after the background-only fit to data. The systematics uncertainty is shown for the post-fit background sum, including the background statistical uncertainty. The individual background components are obtained after the fit, too. There are also the pre-fit background sum and the expected signal distribution. The distribution of the $W^{\prime}$ boson signal for a mass of 3 TeV is normalised to the predicted cross-section. The last bin in each distribution includes overflow.
Distribution (events/100 GeV) of the reconstructed $m_{tb}$ for data and backgrounds in the 0-lepton channel's the signal region 3 after the background-only fit to data. The systematics uncertainty is shown for the post-fit background sum, including the background statistical uncertainty. The individual background components are obtained after the fit, too. There are also the pre-fit background sum and the expected signal distribution. The distribution of the $W^{\prime}$ boson signal for a mass of 3 TeV is normalised to the predicted cross-section. The last bin in each distribution includes overflow.
Distribution (events/100 GeV) of the reconstructed $m_{tb}$ for data and backgrounds in the 0-lepton channel's validation region before the fit to data. The systematics uncertainty is shown for the pre-fit background sum, including the background statistical uncertainty. The individual background components are obtained before the fit, too. There is also the expected signal distribution. The distribution of the $W^{\prime}$ boson signal for a mass of 3 TeV is normalised to the predicted cross-section. The last bin in each distribution includes overflow.
Reconstructed $m_{tb}$ distributions (events/50 GeV) for data and backgrounds in the 1-lepton channel's 2j1b signal region after the background-only fit to data. The systematics uncertainty is shown for the post-fit background sum, including the background statistical uncertainty. The individual background components are obtained after the fit, too. There are also the pre-fit background sum and the expected signal distribution. The distribution of the $W^{\prime}$ boson signal for a mass of 3 TeV is normalised to the predicted cross-section. The last bin in each distribution includes overflow.
Reconstructed $m_{tb}$ distributions (events/50 GeV) for data and backgrounds in the 1-lepton channel's 3j1b signal region after the background-only fit to data. The systematics uncertainty is shown for the post-fit background sum, including the background statistical uncertainty. The individual background components are obtained after the fit, too. There are also the pre-fit background sum and the expected signal distribution. The distribution of the $W^{\prime}$ boson signal for a mass of 3 TeV is normalised to the predicted cross-section. The last bin in each distribution includes overflow.
Reconstructed $m_{tb}$ distributions (events/50 GeV) for data and backgrounds in the 1-lepton channel's 2j2b signal region after the background-only fit to data. The systematics uncertainty is shown for the post-fit background sum, including the background statistical uncertainty. The individual background components are obtained after the fit, too. There are also the pre-fit background sum and the expected signal distribution. The distribution of the $W^{\prime}$ boson signal for a mass of 3 TeV is normalised to the predicted cross-section. The last bin in each distribution includes overflow.
Reconstructed $m_{tb}$ distributions (events/50 GeV) for data and backgrounds in the 1-lepton channel's 3j2b signal region after the background-only fit to data. The systematics uncertainty is shown for the post-fit background sum, including the background statistical uncertainty. The individual background components are obtained after the fit, too. There are also the pre-fit background sum and the expected signal distribution. The distribution of the $W^{\prime}$ boson signal for a mass of 3 TeV is normalised to the predicted cross-section. The last bin in each distribution includes overflow.
Reconstructed $m_{tb}$ distributions (events/50 GeV) for data and backgrounds in the 1-lepton channel's 2j1b control region after the background-only fit to data. The systematics uncertainty is shown for the post-fit background sum, including the background statistical uncertainty. The individual background components are obtained after the fit, too. There are also the pre-fit background sum and the expected signal distribution. The distribution of the $W^{\prime}$ boson signal for a mass of 3 TeV is normalised to the predicted cross-section. The last bin in each distribution includes overflow.
Reconstructed $m_{tb}$ distributions (events/50 GeV) for data and backgrounds in the 1-lepton channel's 3j1b control region after the background-only fit to data. The systematics uncertainty is shown for the post-fit background sum, including the background statistical uncertainty. The individual background components are obtained after the fit, too. There are also the pre-fit background sum and the expected signal distribution. The distribution of the $W^{\prime}$ boson signal for a mass of 3 TeV is normalised to the predicted cross-section. The last bin in each distribution includes overflow.
Reconstructed $m_{tb}$ distributions (events/50 GeV) for data and backgrounds in the 1-lepton channel's 2j1b validation region after the background-only fit to data. The systematics uncertainty is shown for the post-fit background sum, including the background statistical uncertainty. The individual background components are obtained after the fit, too. There are also the pre-fit background sum and the expected signal distribution. The distribution of the $W^{\prime}$ boson signal for a mass of 3 TeV is normalised to the predicted cross-section. The last bin in each distribution includes overflow.
Reconstructed $m_{tb}$ distributions (events/50 GeV) for data and backgrounds in the 1-lepton channel's 3j1b validation region after the background-only fit to data. The systematics uncertainty is shown for the post-fit background sum, including the background statistical uncertainty. The individual background components are obtained after the fit, too. There are also the pre-fit background sum and the expected signal distribution. The distribution of the $W^{\prime}$ boson signal for a mass of 3 TeV is normalised to the predicted cross-section. The last bin in each distribution includes overflow.
Observed and expected 95% CL limits on the cross-section times branching ratio for the production of a $W^{\prime}$ boson with decay to tb and left-handed couplings as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson and a coupling value of $g^{\prime}/g$=0.5. The observed and expected limits are derived using a linear interpolation between simulated signal mass hypotheses. The uncertainty on the theory prediction includes components from factorisation and renormalisation scales, PDFs, the strong coupling constant, and the top-quark mass.
Observed and expected 95% CL limits on the cross-section times branching ratio for the production of a $W^{\prime}$ boson with decay to tb and left-handed couplings as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson and a coupling value of $g^{\prime}/g$=1.0. The observed and expected limits are derived using a linear interpolation between simulated signal mass hypotheses. The uncertainty on the theory prediction includes components from factorisation and renormalisation scales, PDFs, the strong coupling constant, and the top-quark mass.
Observed and expected 95% CL limits on the cross-section times branching ratio for the production of a $W^{\prime}$ boson with decay to tb and left-handed couplings as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson and a coupling value of $g^{\prime}/g$=2.0. The observed and expected limits are derived using a linear interpolation between simulated signal mass hypotheses. The uncertainty on the theory prediction includes components from factorisation and renormalisation scales, PDFs, the strong coupling constant, and the top-quark mass.
Observed and expected 95% CL limits on the cross-section times branching ratio for the production of a $W^{\prime}$ boson with decay to tb and right-handed couplings as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson and a coupling value of $g^{\prime}/g$=0.5. The observed and expected limits are derived using a linear interpolation between simulated signal mass hypotheses. The uncertainty on the theory prediction includes components from factorisation and renormalisation scales, PDFs, the strong coupling constant, and the top-quark mass.
Observed and expected 95% CL limits on the cross-section times branching ratio for the production of a $W^{\prime}$ boson with decay to tb and right-handed couplings as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson and a coupling value of $g^{\prime}/g$=1.0. The observed and expected limits are derived using a linear interpolation between simulated signal mass hypotheses. The uncertainty on the theory prediction includes components from factorisation and renormalisation scales, PDFs, the strong coupling constant, and the top-quark mass.
Observed and expected 95% CL limits on the cross-section times branching ratio for the production of a $W^{\prime}$ boson with decay to tb and right-handed couplings as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson and a coupling value of $g^{\prime}/g$=2.0. The observed and expected limits are derived using a linear interpolation between simulated signal mass hypotheses. The uncertainty on the theory prediction includes components from factorisation and renormalisation scales, PDFs, the strong coupling constant, and the top-quark mass.
95% CL limits on the coupling value ($g^{\prime}/g$) and the $W^{\prime}$-boson mass for left-handed $W^{\prime}$-boson couplings. The area above the line is excluded.
95% CL limits on the coupling value ($g^{\prime}/g$) and the $W^{\prime}$-boson mass for right-handed $W^{\prime}$-boson couplings. The area above the line is excluded.
The product of fiducial acceptance and selection efficiency for the three signal regions of the 0-lepton channel as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson with left-handed chirality. The $W^{\prime}$ boson coupling strength is set to $g^{\prime}/g=1$.
The product of fiducial acceptance and selection efficiency for the three signal regions of the 0-lepton channel as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson with left-handed chirality. The $W^{\prime}$ boson coupling strength is set to $g^{\prime}/g=0.5$.
The product of fiducial acceptance and selection efficiency for the three signal regions of the 0-lepton channel as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson with left-handed chirality. The $W^{\prime}$ boson coupling strength is set to $g^{\prime}/g=2$.
The product of fiducial acceptance and selection efficiency for the four signal regions of the 1-lepton channel as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson with left-handed chirality. The $W^{\prime}$ boson coupling strength is set to $g^{\prime}/g=1$.
The product of fiducial acceptance and selection efficiency for the four signal regions of the 1-lepton channel as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson with left-handed chirality. The $W^{\prime}$ boson coupling strength is set to $g^{\prime}/g=0.5$.
The product of fiducial acceptance and selection efficiency for the four signal regions of the 1-lepton channel as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson with left-handed chirality. The $W^{\prime}$ boson coupling strength is set to $g^{\prime}/g=2$.
The product of fiducial acceptance and selection efficiency for the three signal regions of the 0-lepton channel as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson with right-handed chirality. The $W^{\prime}$ boson coupling strength is set to $g^{\prime}/g=1$.
The product of fiducial acceptance and selection efficiency for the three signal regions of the 0-lepton channel as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson with right-handed chirality. The $W^{\prime}$ boson coupling strength is set to $g^{\prime}/g=0.5$.
The product of fiducial acceptance and selection efficiency for the three signal regions of the 0-lepton channel as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson with right-handed chirality. The $W^{\prime}$ boson coupling strength is set to $g^{\prime}/g=2$.
The product of fiducial acceptance and selection efficiency for the four signal regions of the 1-lepton channel as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson with right-handed chirality. The $W^{\prime}$ boson coupling strength is set to $g^{\prime}/g=1$.
The product of fiducial acceptance and selection efficiency for the four signal regions of the 1-lepton channel as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson with right-handed chirality. The $W^{\prime}$ boson coupling strength is set to $g^{\prime}/g=0.5$.
The product of fiducial acceptance and selection efficiency for the four signal regions of the 1-lepton channel as a function of the mass of the $W^{\prime}$ boson with right-handed chirality. The $W^{\prime}$ boson coupling strength is set to $g^{\prime}/g=2$.
A search for the electroweak production of pairs of charged sleptons or charginos decaying into two-lepton final states with missing transverse momentum is presented. Two simplified models of $R$-parity-conserving supersymmetry are considered: direct pair-production of sleptons ($\tilde{\ell}\tilde{\ell}$), with each decaying into a charged lepton and a $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ neutralino, and direct pair-production of the lightest charginos $(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm\tilde{\chi}_1^\mp)$, with each decaying into a $W$-boson and a $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$. The lightest neutralino ($\tilde{\chi}_1^0$) is assumed to be the lightest supersymmetric particle (LSP). The analyses target the experimentally challenging mass regions where $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm)-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ are close to the $W$-boson mass (`moderately compressed' regions). The search uses 139 fb$^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV proton-proton collisions recorded by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. No significant excesses over the expected background are observed. Exclusion limits on the simplified models under study are reported in the ($\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0$) and ($\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm,\tilde{\chi}_1^0$) mass planes at 95% confidence level (CL). Sleptons with masses up to 150 GeV are excluded at 95% CL for the case of a mass-splitting between sleptons and the LSP of 50 GeV. Chargino masses up to 140 GeV are excluded at 95% CL for the case of a mass-splitting between the chargino and the LSP down to about 100 GeV.
<b>- - - - - - - - Overview of HEPData Record - - - - - - - -</b> <b>Title: </b><em>Search for direct pair production of sleptons and charginos decaying to two leptons and neutralinos with mass splittings near the $W$ boson mass in $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV $pp$ collisions with the ATLAS detector</em> <b>Paper website:</b> <a href="https://atlas.web.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/PHYSICS/PAPERS/SUSY-2019-02/">SUSY-2019-02</a> <b>Exclusion contours</b> <ul><li><b>Sleptons:</b> <a href=?table=excl_comb_obs_nominal>Combined Observed Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_obs_up>Combined Observed Up</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_obs_down>Combined Observed Down</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_exp_nominal>Combined Expected Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_exp_up>Combined Expected Up</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_exp_down>Combined Expected Down</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_obs_nominal_dM>Combined Observed Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_obs_up_dM>Combined Observed Up $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_obs_down_dM>Combined Observed Down $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_exp_nominal_dM>Combined Expected Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_exp_up_dM>Combined Expected Up $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_exp_down_dM>Combined Expected Down $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_ee_obs_nominal>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{L,R}$ Observed Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_ee_exp_nominal>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{L,R}$ Expected Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_eLeL_obs_nominal>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{L}$ Observed Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_eLeL_exp_nominal>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{L}$ Expected Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_eReR_obs_nominal>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{R}$ Observed Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_eReR_exp_nominal>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{R}$ Expected Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_ee_obs_nominal_dM>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{L,R}$ Observed Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_ee_exp_nominal_dM>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{L,R}$ Expected Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_eLeL_obs_nominal_dM>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{L}$ Observed Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_eLeL_exp_nominal_dM>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{L}$ Expected Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_eReR_obs_nominal_dM>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{R}$ Observed Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_eReR_exp_nominal_dM>$\tilde{e}_\mathrm{R}$ Expected Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_mm_obs_nominal>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{L,R}$ Observed Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_mm_exp_nominal>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{L,R}$ Expected Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_mLmL_obs_nominal>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{L}$ Observed Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_mLmL_exp_nominal>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{L}$ Expected Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_mRmR_obs_nominal>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{R}$ Observed Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_mRmR_exp_nominal>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{R}$ Expected Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_mm_obs_nominal_dM>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{L,R}$ Observed Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_mm_exp_nominal_dM>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{L,R}$ Expected Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_mLmL_obs_nominal_dM>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{L}$ Observed Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_mLmL_exp_nominal_dM>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{L}$ Expected Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_mRmR_obs_nominal_dM>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{R}$ Observed Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_mRmR_exp_nominal_dM>$\tilde{\mu}_\mathrm{R}$ Expected Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_obs_nominal_SR0j>Combined Observed Nominal SR-0j</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_exp_nominal_SR0j>Combined Expected Nominal SR-0j</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_obs_nominal_SR1j>Combined Observed Nominal SR-1j</a> <a href=?table=excl_comb_exp_nominal_SR1j>Combined Expected Nominal SR-1j</a> <li><b>Charginos:</b> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_obs_nominal>Observed Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_obs_up>Observed Up</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_obs_down>Observed Down</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_exp_nominal>Expected Nominal</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_exp_nominal>Expected Up</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_exp_nominal>Expected Down</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_obs_nominal_dM>Observed Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_obs_up_dM>Observed Up $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_obs_down_dM>Observed Down $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_exp_nominal_dM>Expected Nominal $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_exp_nominal_dM>Expected Up $(\Delta m)$</a> <a href=?table=excl_c1c1_exp_nominal_dM>Expected Down $(\Delta m)$</a> </ul> <b>Upper Limits</b> <ul><li><b>Sleptons:</b> <a href=?table=UL_slep>ULs</a> <li><b>Charginos:</b> <a href=?table=UL_c1c1>ULs</a> </ul> <b>Pull Plots</b> <ul><li><b>Sleptons:</b> <a href=?table=pullplot_slep>SRs summary plot</a> <li><b>Charginos:</b> <a href=?table=pullplot_c1c1>SRs summary plot</a> </ul> <b>Cutflows</b> <ul><li><b>Sleptons:</b> <a href=?table=Cutflow_slep_SR0j>Towards SR-0J</a> <a href=?table=Cutflow_slep_SR1j>Towards SR-1J</a> <li><b>Charginos:</b> <a href=?table=Cutflow_SRs>Towards SRs</a> </ul> <b>Acceptance and Efficiencies</b> <ul><li><b>Sleptons:</b> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_100_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_100_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_110_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_110_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_120_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_120_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_130_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_130_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_100_105>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,105)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_100_105>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,105)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_105_110>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[105,110)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_105_110>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[105,110)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_110_115>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,115)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_110_115>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,115)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_115_120>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[115,120)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_115_120>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[115,120)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_120_125>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,125)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_125_130>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[125,130)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_130_140>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,140)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_130_140>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,140)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR0j_MT2_140_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[140,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR0j_MT2_140_infty>SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[140,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_100_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_100_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_110_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_110_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_120_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_120_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_130_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_130_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_100_105>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,105)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_100_105>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,105)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_105_110>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[105,110)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_105_110>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[105,110)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_110_115>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,115)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_110_115>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,115)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_115_120>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[115,120)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_115_120>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[115,120)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_120_125>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,125)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_125_130>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[125,130)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_130_140>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,140)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_130_140>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,140)$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR1j_MT2_140_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[140,\infty)$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR1j_MT2_140_infty>SR-1j $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[140,\infty)$ Efficiency</a> <li><b>Charginos:</b> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_81_1_SF_77_1>SR$^{\text{-DF BDT-signal}\in(0.81,1]}_{\text{-SF BDT-signal}\in(0.77,1]}$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_81_1_SF_77_1>SR$^{\text{-DF BDT-signal}\in(0.81,1]}_{\text{-SF BDT-signal}\in(0.77,1]}$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_81_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_81_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_82_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.82,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_82_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.82,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_83_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.83,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_83_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.83,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_84_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.84,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_84_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.84,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_85_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.85,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_85_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.85,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_81_8125>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,8125]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_81_8125>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,8125]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_8125_815>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8125,815]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_8125_815>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8125,815]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_815_8175>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.815,8175]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_815_8175>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.815,8175]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_8175_82>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8175,82]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_8175_82>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8175,82]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_82_8225>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.82,8225]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_82_8225>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.82,8225]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_8225_825>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8225,825]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_8225_825>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8225,825]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_825_8275>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.825,8275]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_825_8275>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.825,8275]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_8275_83>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8275,83]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_8275_83>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8275,83]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_83_8325>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.83,8325]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_83_8325>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.83,8325]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_8325_835>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8325,835]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_8325_835>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8325,835]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_835_8375>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.835,8375]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_835_8375>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.835,8375]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_8375_84>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8375,84]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_8375_84>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8375,84]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_84_845>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.85,845]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_84_845>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.85,845]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_845_85>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.845,85]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_845_85>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.845,85]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_85_86>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.85,86]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_85_86>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.85,86]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_DF_86_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.86,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_DF_86_1>SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.86,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_77_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.77,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_77_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.77,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_78_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.78,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_78_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.78,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_79_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.79,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_79_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.79,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_80_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.80,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_80_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.80,1]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_77_775>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.77,0.775]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_77_775>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.77,0.775]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_775_78>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.775,0.78]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_775_78>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.775,0.78]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_78_785>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.78,0.785]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_78_785>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.78,0.785]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_785_79>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.785,0.79]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_785_79>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.785,0.79]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_79_795>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.79,0.795]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_79_795>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.79,0.795]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_795_80>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.795,0.80]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_795_80>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.795,0.80]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_80_81>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.80,0.81]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_80_81>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.80,0.81]$ Efficiency</a> <a href=?table=Acceptance_SR_SF_81_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,1]$ Acceptance</a> <a href=?table=Efficiency_SR_SF_81_1>SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,1]$ Efficiency</a></ul> <b>Truth Code snippets</b>, <b>SLHA</b> and <b>machine learning</b> files are available under "Resources" (purple button on the left)
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,105)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,105)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[105,110)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[105,110)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,115)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,115)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[115,120)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[115,120)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,125)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,125)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[125,130)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[125,130)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,140)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,140)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[140,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[140,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,105)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[100,105)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[105,110)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[105,110)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,115)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[110,115)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[115,120)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[115,120)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,125)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[120,125)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[125,130)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[125,130)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,140)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[130,140)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[140,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the slepton pair production model, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in[140,\infty)$ region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
Cutflow table for the slepton signal sample with $m(\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0) = (100,70)$ GeV, in the SR-0J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in [100,\infty)$ region. The yields include the process cross section and are weighted to the 139 fb$^{-1}$ luminosity. 246000 events were generated for the sample.
Cutflow table for the slepton signal sample with $m(\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0) = (100,70)$ GeV, in the SR-1J $m_{\mathrm{T2}}^{100} \in [100,\infty)$ region. The yields include the process cross section and are weighted to the 139 fb$^{-1}$ luminosity. 246000 events were generated for the sample.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models, with observed upper limits on signal cross-section (fb) overlaid, for slepton-pair production in the $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ plane. Only $\tilde{e}$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ are considered. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for slepton-pair production in the (a) $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\ell})-\Delta m(\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. Only $\tilde{e}$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ are considered. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for slepton-pair production in the (a) $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\ell})-\Delta m(\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. Only $\tilde{e}$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ are considered. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for slepton-pair production in the (a) $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\ell})-\Delta m(\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. Only $\tilde{e}$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ are considered. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for slepton-pair production in the (a) $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\ell})-\Delta m(\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. Only $\tilde{e}$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ are considered. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for slepton-pair production in the (a) $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\ell})-\Delta m(\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. Only $\tilde{e}$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ are considered. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for slepton-pair production in the (a) $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\ell})-\Delta m(\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. Only $\tilde{e}$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ are considered. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for slepton-pair production in the (a) $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\ell})-\Delta m(\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. Only $\tilde{e}$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ are considered. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for slepton-pair production in the (a) $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\ell})-\Delta m(\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. Only $\tilde{e}$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ are considered. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for slepton-pair production in the (a) $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\ell})-\Delta m(\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. Only $\tilde{e}$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ are considered. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for slepton-pair production in the (a) $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\ell})-\Delta m(\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. Only $\tilde{e}$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ are considered. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for slepton-pair production in the (a) $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\ell})-\Delta m(\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. Only $\tilde{e}$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ are considered. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for slepton-pair production in the (a) $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\ell})-\Delta m(\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. Only $\tilde{e}$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ are considered. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for direct selectron production in the (a) $m(\tilde{e})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (c) $m(\tilde{e})-\Delta m(\tilde{e},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes, and for direct smuon production in the (b) $m(\tilde{\mu})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (d) $m(\tilde{\mu})-\Delta m(\tilde{\mu},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. In Figure (a) and (c) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{e}_{\textup{L}}$ and $\tilde{e}_{\textup{R}}$. In Figure (b) and (d) the observed (solid thick lines) and expected (dashed lines) exclusion contours are indicated for combined $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L,R}}$ and for $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{L}}$. No unique sensitivity to $\tilde{\mu}_{\textup{R}}$ is observed. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown in the shaded areas.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for slepton-pair production in the $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ plane. Only $\tilde{e}$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ are considered. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The red contour shows the exclusion limits obtained using both the SR-0J and SR-1J region, as presented in Figure 6. The blue and green contours correspond to the result obtained considering only SR-0J and SR-1J region respectively. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for slepton-pair production in the $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ plane. Only $\tilde{e}$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ are considered. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The red contour shows the exclusion limits obtained using both the SR-0J and SR-1J region, as presented in Figure 6. The blue and green contours correspond to the result obtained considering only SR-0J and SR-1J region respectively. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for slepton-pair production in the $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ plane. Only $\tilde{e}$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ are considered. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The red contour shows the exclusion limits obtained using both the SR-0J and SR-1J region, as presented in Figure 6. The blue and green contours correspond to the result obtained considering only SR-0J and SR-1J region respectively. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for slepton-pair production in the $m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ plane. Only $\tilde{e}$ and $\tilde{\mu}$ are considered. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The red contour shows the exclusion limits obtained using both the SR-0J and SR-1J region, as presented in Figure 6. The blue and green contours correspond to the result obtained considering only SR-0J and SR-1J region respectively. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown.
The upper panel shows the observed number of events in each of the binned SRs defined in Table 3, together with the expected SM backgrounds obtained after applying the efficiency correction method to compute the number of expected FSB events. `Others' include the non-dominant background sources, e.g. $t \bar{t}$+$V$, Higgs boson and Drell--Yan events. The uncertainty band includes systematic and statistical errors from all sources. The distributions of two signal points with mass splittings $\Delta m(\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0) = m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0) = 30$ GeV and $\Delta m(\tilde{\ell},\tilde{\chi}_1^0) = m(\tilde{\ell})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0) = 50$ GeV are overlaid. The lower panel shows the significance as defined in Ref. [115].
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR$^{\text{-DF BDT-signal}\in(0.81,1]}_{\text{-SF BDT-signal}\in(0.77,1]}$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR$^{\text{-DF BDT-signal}\in(0.81,1]}_{\text{-SF BDT-signal}\in(0.77,1]}$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.82,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.82,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.83,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.83,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.84,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.84,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.85,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.85,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,0.8125]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,0.8125]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8125,0.815]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8125,0.815]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.815,0.8175]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.815,0.8175]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8175,0.82]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8175,0.82]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.82,0.8225]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.82,0.8225]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8225,0.825]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8225,0.825]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.825,0.8275]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.825,0.8275]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8275,0.83]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8275,0.83]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.83,0.8325]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.83,0.8325]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8325,0.835]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8325,0.835]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.835,0.8375]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.835,0.8375]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8375,0.84]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.8375,0.84]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.84,0.845]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.84,0.845]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.845,0.85]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.845,0.85]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.85,0.86]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.85,0.86]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.86,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-DF BDT-signal$\in(0.86,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.77,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.77,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.78,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.78,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.79,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.79,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.80,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.80,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.77,0.775]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.77,0.775]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.775,0.78]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.775,0.78]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.78,0.785]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.78,0.785]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.785,0.79]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.785,0.79]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.79,0.795]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.79,0.795]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.795,0.80]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.795,0.80]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.80,0.81]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.80,0.81]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
The figure shows the signal acceptance (a) and efficiency (b) plots for the $\tilde{\chi}_1^+\tilde{\chi}_1^-$ production with $W$-boson-mediated decay model, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in(0.81,1]$ inclusive region. Acceptance is calculated by applying the signal region requirements to particle-level objects, which do not suffer from identification inefficiencies or mismeasurements. The efficiency is calculated with fully reconstructed objects with the acceptance divided out. Large acceptance and efficiency differences in neighbouring points are due to statistical fluctuations.
Cutflow table for the chargino signal sample with $m\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}_1^0=(125,25)$ GeV, in the SR-SF BDT-signal$\in (0.77,1]$ and SR-DF BDT-signal$\in (0.81,1]$ regions. The yields include the process cross-section and are weighted to the 139 fb$^{-1}$ luminosity. 170000 events were generated for the sample.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models, with observed upper limits on signal cross-section (fb) overlaid, for chargino-pair production with $W$-boson-mediated decays in the $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ plane. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown. In case of the search performed on ATLAS Run 1 data at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV no sensitivity was expected for the exclusion in the mass plane.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for chargino-pair production with $W$-boson-mediated decays in the (a) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown. In case of the search performed on ATLAS Run 1 data at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV no sensitivity was expected for the exclusion in the mass plane.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for chargino-pair production with $W$-boson-mediated decays in the (a) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown. In case of the search performed on ATLAS Run 1 data at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV no sensitivity was expected for the exclusion in the mass plane.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for chargino-pair production with $W$-boson-mediated decays in the (a) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown. In case of the search performed on ATLAS Run 1 data at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV no sensitivity was expected for the exclusion in the mass plane.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for chargino-pair production with $W$-boson-mediated decays in the (a) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown. In case of the search performed on ATLAS Run 1 data at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV no sensitivity was expected for the exclusion in the mass plane.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for chargino-pair production with $W$-boson-mediated decays in the (a) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown. In case of the search performed on ATLAS Run 1 data at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV no sensitivity was expected for the exclusion in the mass plane.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for chargino-pair production with $W$-boson-mediated decays in the (a) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown. In case of the search performed on ATLAS Run 1 data at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV no sensitivity was expected for the exclusion in the mass plane.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for chargino-pair production with $W$-boson-mediated decays in the (a) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown. In case of the search performed on ATLAS Run 1 data at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV no sensitivity was expected for the exclusion in the mass plane.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for chargino-pair production with $W$-boson-mediated decays in the (a) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown. In case of the search performed on ATLAS Run 1 data at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV no sensitivity was expected for the exclusion in the mass plane.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for chargino-pair production with $W$-boson-mediated decays in the (a) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown. In case of the search performed on ATLAS Run 1 data at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV no sensitivity was expected for the exclusion in the mass plane.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for chargino-pair production with $W$-boson-mediated decays in the (a) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown. In case of the search performed on ATLAS Run 1 data at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV no sensitivity was expected for the exclusion in the mass plane.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for chargino-pair production with $W$-boson-mediated decays in the (a) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown. In case of the search performed on ATLAS Run 1 data at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV no sensitivity was expected for the exclusion in the mass plane.
Observed and expected exclusion limits on SUSY simplified models for chargino-pair production with $W$-boson-mediated decays in the (a) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-m(\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ and (b) $m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm})-\Delta m(\tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm},\tilde{\chi}_1^0)$ planes. The observed (solid thick line) and expected (thin dashed line) exclusion contours are indicated. The shaded band around the dashed line corresponds to the $\pm 1 \sigma$ variations in the expected limit, including all uncertainties except theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section. The dotted lines around the observed limit illustrate the change in the observed limit as the nominal signal cross-section is scaled up and down by the theoretical uncertainty. All limits are computed at 95% CL. The observed limits obtained at LEP and by the ATLAS experiment in previous searches are also shown. In case of the search performed on ATLAS Run 1 data at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV no sensitivity was expected for the exclusion in the mass plane.
The upper panel shows the observed number of events in the SRs defined in Table 3, together with the expected SM backgrounds obtained after the background fit in the CRs. `Others' include the non-dominant background sources, e.g.$t \bar{t}$+$V$, Higgs boson and Drell--Yan events. The uncertainty band includes systematic and statistical errors from all sources. Distributions for three benchmark signal points are overlaid for comparison. The lower panel shows the significance as defined in Ref. [115].
A search for pair production of squarks or gluinos decaying via sleptons or weak bosons is reported. The search targets a final state with exactly two leptons with same-sign electric charge or at least three leptons without any charge requirement. The analysed data set corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ of proton$-$proton collisions collected at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV with the ATLAS detector at the LHC. Multiple signal regions are defined, targeting several SUSY simplified models yielding the desired final states. A single control region is used to constrain the normalisation of the $WZ$+jets background. No significant excess of events over the Standard Model expectation is observed. The results are interpreted in the context of several supersymmetric models featuring R-parity conservation or R-parity violation, yielding exclusion limits surpassing those from previous searches. In models considering gluino (squark) pair production, gluino (squark) masses up to 2.2 (1.7) TeV are excluded at 95% confidence level.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(a) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(a) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Negative one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(a) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(a) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
One $\sigma$ band of expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(a) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(c) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(c) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Negative one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(c) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(c) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
One $\sigma$ band of expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(c) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(f) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$
Positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(f) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$
Negative one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(f) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(f) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$
One $\sigma$ band of expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(f) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(e) for direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$
Positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(e) for direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$
Negative one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(e) for direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(e) for direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$
One $\sigma$ band of expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(e) for direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(b) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(b) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Negative one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(b) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(b) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
One $\sigma$ band of expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(b) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(d) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(d) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Negative one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(d) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(d) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
One $\sigma$ band of expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from Fig 7(d) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
N-1 distribution for $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$of observed data and expected background in SRGGWZ-H.
N-1 distribution for $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{miss}}$of observed data and expected background in SRGGSlep-M.
N-1 distribution for $\sum{p_{\mathrm{T}}^\mathrm{jet}}$of observed data and expected background in SRUDD-ge2b.
N-1 distribution for $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$of observed data and expected background in SRLQD.
N-1 distribution for $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$of observed data and expected background in SRSSWZ-H.
N-1 distribution for $m_{\mathrm{eff}}$of observed data and expected background in SRSSSlep-H(loose).
Signal acceptance for SRGGWZ-H signal region from Fig 10(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal efficiency for SRGGWZ-H signal region from Fig 15(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal acceptance for SRGGWZ-M signal region from Fig 10(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal efficiency for SRGGWZ-M signal region from Fig 15(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal acceptance for SRGGWZ-L signal region from Fig 10(a) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal efficiency for SRGGWZ-L signal region from Fig 15(a) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal acceptance for SRGGSlep-L signal region from Fig 12(a) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal efficiency for SRGGSlep-L signal region from Fig 17(a) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal acceptance for SRGGSlep-M signal region from Fig 12(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal efficiency for SRGGSlep-M signal region from Fig 17(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal acceptance for SRGGSlep-H signal region from Fig 12(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal efficiency for SRGGSlep-H signal region from Fig 17(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal acceptance for SRUDD-1b signal region from Fig 14(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$
Signal efficiency for SRUDD-1b signal region from Fig 19(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$
Signal acceptance for SRUDD-2b signal region from Fig 14(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$
Signal efficiency for SRUDD-2b signal region from Fig 19(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$
Signal acceptance for SRUDD-ge2b signal region from Fig 14(d) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$
Signal efficiency for SRUDD-ge2b signal region from Fig 19(d) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$
Signal acceptance for SRUDD-ge3b signal region from Fig 14(e) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$
Signal efficiency for SRUDD-ge3b signal region from Fig 19(e) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$
Signal acceptance for SRLQD signal region from Fig 14(a) in a SUSY scenario where direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$
Signal efficiency for SRLQD signal region from Fig 19(a) in a SUSY scenario where direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$
Signal acceptance for SRSSWZ-L signal region from Fig 11(a) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal efficiency for SRSSWZ-L signal region from Fig 16(a) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal acceptance for SRSSWZ-ML signal region from Fig 11(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal efficiency for SRSSWZ-ML signal region from Fig 16(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal acceptance for SRSSWZ-MH signal region from Fig 11(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal efficiency for SRSSWZ-MH signal region from Fig 16(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal acceptance for SRSSWZ-H signal region from Fig 11(d) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal efficiency for SRSSWZ-H signal region from Fig 16(d) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal acceptance for SRSSSlep-H signal region from Fig 13(d) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal efficiency for SRSSSlep-H signal region from Fig 18(d) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal acceptance for SRSSSlep-MH signal region from Fig 13(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal efficiency for SRSSSlep-MH signal region from Fig 18(c) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal acceptance for SRSSSlep-L signal region from Fig 13(a) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal efficiency for SRSSSlep-L signal region from Fig 18(a) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal acceptance for SRSSSlep-ML signal region from Fig 13(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal efficiency for SRSSSlep-ML signal region from Fig 18(b) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal acceptance for SRSSSlep-H(loose) signal region from Fig 13(e) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Signal efficiency for SRSSSlep-H(loose) signal region from Fig 18(e) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRGGWZ-H in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 1400 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 1000 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRGGWZ-M in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 1400 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 1000 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRGGWZ-L in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 1400 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 1000 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRGGSlep-L in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 2000 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 500 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRGGSlep-M in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 2000 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 500 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRGGSlep-H in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 2000 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 500 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRUDD-1b in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 1600 GeV, $m(\tilde{t})$ = 600 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRUDD-2b in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 1600 GeV, $m(\tilde{t})$ = 600 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRUDD-ge2b in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 1600 GeV, $m(\tilde{t})$ = 600 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRUDD-ge3b in a susy scenario where $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 1600 GeV, $m(\tilde{t})$ = 600 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRLQD in a susy scenario where direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{g})$ = 2200 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 1870 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSWZ-L in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 800 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 600 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSWZ-ML in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 800 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 600 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSWZ-MH in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 800 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 600 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSWZ-H in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 800 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 600 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSSlep-H in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 1000 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 800 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSSlep-MH in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 1000 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 800 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSSlep-L in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 1000 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 800 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSSlep-ML in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 1000 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 800 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region SRSSSlep-H(loose) in a susy scenario where $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{q})$ = 1000 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}})$ = 800 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Cross-section upper limits at 95% CL from Fig1(a) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Cross-section upper limits at 95% CL from Fig1(c) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Cross-section upper limits at 95% CL from Fig1(f) for $\tilde{g}$ decays into anti-top and $\tilde{t}$ and $\tilde{t}$ decays via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda''$
Cross-section upper limits at 95% CL from Fig1(e) for direct $\tilde{\chi_{1}^{0}}$ decay into SM leptons and quarks via a non-zero RPV coupling $\lambda'$
Cross-section upper limits at 95% CL from Fig1(b) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into SM gauge bosons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
Cross-section upper limits at 95% CL from Fig1(d) for $\tilde{q}$ decays into sleptons and subsequently to SM leptons and $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}$
This paper presents a search for dark matter, $\chi$, using events with a single top quark and an energetic $W$ boson. The analysis is based on proton-proton collision data collected with the ATLAS experiment at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV during LHC Run 2 (2015-2018), corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The search considers final states with zero or one charged lepton (electron or muon), at least one $b$-jet and large missing transverse momentum. In addition, a result from a previous search considering two-charged-lepton final states is included in the interpretation of the results. The data are found to be in good agreement with the Standard Model predictions and the results are interpreted in terms of 95% confidence-level exclusion limits in the context of a class of dark matter models involving an extended two-Higgs-doublet sector together with a pseudoscalar mediator particle. The search is particularly sensitive to on-shell production of the charged Higgs boson state, $H^{\pm}$, arising from the two-Higgs-doublet mixing, and its semi-invisible decays via the mediator particle, $a$: $H^{\pm} \rightarrow W^\pm a (\rightarrow \chi\chi)$. Signal models with $H^{\pm}$ masses up to 1.5 TeV and $a$ masses up to 350 GeV are excluded assuming a tan$\beta$ value of 1. For masses of $a$ of 150 (250) GeV, tan$\beta$ values up to 2 are excluded for $H^{\pm}$ masses between 200 (400) GeV and 1.5 TeV. Signals with tan$\beta$ values between 20 and 30 are excluded for $H^{\pm}$ masses between 500 and 800 GeV.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
The distributions of $m_{\mathrm{b1},\mathrm{W-tagged}}$ in the 0L inclusive signal region. For each bin yields for the data and total SM prediction are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the total uncertainty, including the MC statistical uncertainty, detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.
The distributions of $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{b,E_{\mathrm{T}^{\mathrm{miss}}}}}$ in the 0L inclusive signal region. For each bin yields for the data and total SM prediction are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the total uncertainty, including the MC statistical uncertainty, detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.
The distributions of $N_{\mathrm{W-tagged}}$ in the 0L inclusive signal region. For each bin yields for the data and total SM prediction are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the total uncertainty, including the MC statistical uncertainty, detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.
The distributions of $m_{\mathrm{b1},\mathrm{\cancel{b1}}}$ in the hadronic top inclusive signal region. For each bin yields for the data and total SM prediction are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the total uncertainty, including the MC statistical uncertainty, detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.
The distributions of $m_{\mathrm{b1},\mathrm{\cancel{b1}}}$ in the leptonic top inclusive signal region. For each bin yields for the data and total SM prediction are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the total uncertainty, including the MC statistical uncertainty, detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.
The distributions of $m_{\mathrm{b1},\mathrm{\cancel{b1}}}$ in the leptonic top inclusive signal region. For each bin yields for the data and total SM prediction are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the total uncertainty, including the MC statistical uncertainty, detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.
Cutflow for the reference point $(\it{m}_{\mathrm{H^{\pm}}}, \it{m}_{a}, tan\beta, sin\theta )=$ (500,100,1,0.7) , (800,150,20,0.7), (600,250,30,0.7), (1000,400,1,0.7) in 0L regions. Results are shown including all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 139 fb$^{-1}$.
Cutflow for the reference point $(\it{m}_{\mathrm{H^{\pm}}}, \it{m}_{a}, tan\beta, sin\theta )=$ (500,100,1,0.7) , (800,150,20,0.7), (600,250,30,0.7), (1000,400,1,0.7) in 1L leptonic top regions. Results are shown including all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 139 fb$^{-1}$.
Cutflow for the reference point $(\it{m}_{\mathrm{H^{\pm}}}, \it{m}_{a}, tan\beta, sin\theta )=$ (500,100,1,0.7) , (800,150,20,0.7), (600,250,30,0.7), (1000,400,1,0.7) in 1L hadronic top regions. Results are shown including all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 139 fb$^{-1}$.
Signal acceptance in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_a$--m$_{H^{\pm}}$ assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_a$--m$_{H^{\pm}}$ assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 150 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 150 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 250 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 250 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_a$--m$_{H^{\pm}}$ assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_a$--m$_{H^{\pm}}$ assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 150 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 150 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 250 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 250 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_a$--m$_{H^{\pm}}$ assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_a$--m$_{H^{\pm}}$ assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 150 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 150 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 250 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 250 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_a$--m$_{H^{\pm}}$ assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_a$--m$_{H^{\pm}}$ assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 150 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 150 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 250 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 250 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
A search for forward proton scattering in association with light-by-light scattering mediated by an axion-like particle is presented, using the ATLAS Forward Proton spectrometer to detect scattered protons and the central ATLAS detector to detect pairs of outgoing photons. Proton-proton collision data recorded in 2017 at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV were analysed, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 14.6 fb$^{-1}$. A total of 441 candidate signal events were selected. A search was made for a narrow resonance in the diphoton mass distribution, corresponding to an axion-like particle (ALP) with mass in the range 150-1600 GeV. No excess is observed above a smooth background. Upper limits on the production cross section of a narrow resonance are set as a function of the mass, and are interpreted as upper limits on the ALP production coupling constant, assuming 100% decay branching ratio into a photon pair. The inferred upper limit on the coupling constant is in the range 0.04-0.09 TeV$^{-1}$ at 95%confidence level.
Signal selection efficiency as a function of ALP mass $m_{\textrm{X}}$ for the exclusive (EL), single-dissociative (SD), and double-dissociative (DD) processes. The ratio of the number of selected events to the number of generated MC events is given (black points) and is parameterised by an analytic function (red solid line). The linear (black dashed line) and cubic (blue chain line) interpolations of the black points are used to derive the envelopes (cyan filled region) which are regarded as systematic uncertainties.
The diphoton mass distribution of the mixed-data sample (black points).
The $(\xi_{\gamma\gamma}^{+},\xi_{\gamma\gamma}^{-})$ distribution of the selected data candidates after the full event selection in $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in [150,1600] GeV with $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ contours (blue) and $y_{\gamma\gamma}$ contours (black). The range of $\xi_{\gamma\gamma}$ in which forward-proton matching is possible, $[0.035-\xi_{\textrm{th}}, 0.08+\xi_{\textrm{th}} ]$, for events that pass the matching requirement to the A or C side as indicated. No event passed the matching requirement for both the A-side and C-side.
Background-only fit to the observed numbers of events (black points) as a function of the diphoton invariant mass $m_{\gamma\gamma}$.
Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on the signal fiducial cross section $\sigma_{\textrm{fid}}$, assuming 100% branching ratio for ALP decay into two photons, as a function of the hypothetical ALP mass $m_{\textrm{X}}$. The 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ confidence intervals are shown by the coloured bands.
Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on the the ALP coupling constant, assuming 100% branching ratio for ALP decay into two photons, as a function of the hypothetical ALP mass $m_{\textrm{X}}$. The 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ confidence intervals are shown by the coloured bands. Contours of the ALP natural width $\Gamma$ are illustrated by the smooth blue solid lines.
Fiducial region acceptance of signal events for coupling constant f$^{-1}=0.05$ TeV$^{-1}$. EL, SD, and DD stand for the exclusive, single-dissociative, and double-dissociative processes. The acceptances are parameterised as $p_0 + p^{i}_{1} e^{p_{2}^{i} m_{\textrm{X}}} + p_{3}^{i} e^{p_{4}^{i} m_{\textrm{X}}} $ , where $i$ specifies the process type, exclusive, single-dissociative, or double-dissociative.
Correction factors $A_{\textrm{X}}/A_{0}$ and $C_{\textrm{X}}$ for the exclusive signal events with ALP coupling constant f$^{-1}$=0.05 TeV$^{-1}$, where acceptance $A_{\textrm{X}}$ and efficiency $C_{\textrm{X}}$ are defined in arXiv:2102.13405. $A_{\textrm{X}}$/$A_{0}$ and $C_{\textrm{X}}$ are parameterised as $p_0 + p^{i}_{1} e^{p_{2}^{i} m_{\textrm{X}}} + p_{3}^{i} e^{p_{4}^{i} m_{\textrm{X}}}$, where $i$ specifies the process type.
Simulated ALP signal cutflow for $m_{\rm{X}}$=300 GeV and $m_{\rm{X}}$=1200 GeV. The yields are normalized to a luminosity of 14.6 fb$^{-1}$. Selections are applied for each side after the selection on acoplanarity. The union of the sets of selected events is taken finally.
A search for chargino$-$neutralino pair production in three-lepton final states with missing transverse momentum is presented. The study is based on a dataset of $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV $pp$ collisions recorded with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. No significant excess relative to the Standard Model predictions is found in data. The results are interpreted in simplified models of supersymmetry, and statistically combined with results from a previous ATLAS search for compressed spectra in two-lepton final states. Various scenarios for the production and decay of charginos ($\tilde\chi^\pm_1$) and neutralinos ($\tilde\chi^0_2$) are considered. For pure higgsino $\tilde\chi^\pm_1\tilde\chi^0_2$ pair-production scenarios, exclusion limits at 95% confidence level are set on $\tilde\chi^0_2$ masses up to 210 GeV. Limits are also set for pure wino $\tilde\chi^\pm_1\tilde\chi^0_2$ pair production, on $\tilde\chi^0_2$ masses up to 640 GeV for decays via on-shell $W$ and $Z$ bosons, up to 300 GeV for decays via off-shell $W$ and $Z$ bosons, and up to 190 GeV for decays via $W$ and Standard Model Higgs bosons.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the CRs (pre-fit) and VRs (post-fit) of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. The bottom panel shows the relative difference between the observed data and expected yields for the CRs and the significance of the difference for the VRs, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the CRs (pre-fit) and VRs (post-fit) of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. The bottom panel shows the relative difference between the observed data and expected yields for the CRs and the significance of the difference for the VRs, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the CRs and VRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the CRs and VRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in the SRs for the onshell $W\!Z$ selection. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample are extracted separately for the 0j, low-H<sub>T</sub> and high-H<sub>T</sub> regions, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in the SRs for the onshell $W\!Z$ selection. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample are extracted separately for the 0j, low-H<sub>T</sub> and high-H<sub>T</sub> regions, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in the SRs for the $W\!h$ selection. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample are extracted separately for the 0j, low-H<sub>T</sub> and high-H<sub>T</sub> regions, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, tt̄+X and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in the SRs for the $W\!h$ selection. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample are extracted separately for the 0j, low-H<sub>T</sub> and high-H<sub>T</sub> regions, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, tt̄+X and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the SRs of the $W\!h$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, tt̄+X and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the SRs of the $W\!h$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, tt̄+X and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample extracted separately for 0j and nj, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample extracted separately for 0j and nj, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample extracted separately for 0j and nj, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample extracted separately for 0j and nj, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W^{*}\!Z^{*}$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W^{*}\!Z^{*}$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR<sub>OS,near</sub> distribution in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p<sub>T</sub> in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-2, and the (c) E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> and (d) m<sub>T</sub> distributions in SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> (with all SR-i bins of SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR<sub>OS,near</sub> distribution in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p<sub>T</sub> in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-2, and the (c) E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> and (d) m<sub>T</sub> distributions in SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> (with all SR-i bins of SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR<sub>OS,near</sub> distribution in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p<sub>T</sub> in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-2, and the (c) E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> and (d) m<sub>T</sub> distributions in SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> (with all SR-i bins of SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR<sub>OS,near</sub> distribution in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p<sub>T</sub> in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-2, and the (c) E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> and (d) m<sub>T</sub> distributions in SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> (with all SR-i bins of SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR<sub>OS,near</sub> distribution in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p<sub>T</sub> in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-2, and the (c) E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> and (d) m<sub>T</sub> distributions in SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> (with all SR-i bins of SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR<sub>OS,near</sub> distribution in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p<sub>T</sub> in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-2, and the (c) E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> and (d) m<sub>T</sub> distributions in SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> (with all SR-i bins of SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR<sub>OS,near</sub> distribution in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p<sub>T</sub> in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-2, and the (c) E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> and (d) m<sub>T</sub> distributions in SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> (with all SR-i bins of SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR<sub>OS,near</sub> distribution in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p<sub>T</sub> in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-2, and the (c) E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> and (d) m<sub>T</sub> distributions in SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> (with all SR-i bins of SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m<sub>T</sub><sup>m<sub>ll</sub>min</sup> distribution in (a) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj and (c) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and the |p<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup>|/E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in (d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj. The contributing m<sub>ll</sub><sup>min</sup> mass bins within each SR<sup>offWZ</sup> category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m<sub>T</sub><sup>m<sub>ll</sub>min</sup> distribution in (a) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj and (c) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and the |p<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup>|/E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in (d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj. The contributing m<sub>ll</sub><sup>min</sup> mass bins within each SR<sup>offWZ</sup> category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m<sub>T</sub><sup>m<sub>ll</sub>min</sup> distribution in (a) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj and (c) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and the |p<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup>|/E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in (d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj. The contributing m<sub>ll</sub><sup>min</sup> mass bins within each SR<sup>offWZ</sup> category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m<sub>T</sub><sup>m<sub>ll</sub>min</sup> distribution in (a) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj and (c) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and the |p<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup>|/E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in (d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj. The contributing m<sub>ll</sub><sup>min</sup> mass bins within each SR<sup>offWZ</sup> category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m<sub>T</sub><sup>m<sub>ll</sub>min</sup> distribution in (a) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj and (c) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and the |p<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup>|/E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in (d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj. The contributing m<sub>ll</sub><sup>min</sup> mass bins within each SR<sup>offWZ</sup> category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m<sub>T</sub><sup>m<sub>ll</sub>min</sup> distribution in (a) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj and (c) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and the |p<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup>|/E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in (d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj. The contributing m<sub>ll</sub><sup>min</sup> mass bins within each SR<sup>offWZ</sup> category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m<sub>T</sub><sup>m<sub>ll</sub>min</sup> distribution in (a) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj and (c) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and the |p<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup>|/E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in (d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj. The contributing m<sub>ll</sub><sup>min</sup> mass bins within each SR<sup>offWZ</sup> category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m<sub>T</sub><sup>m<sub>ll</sub>min</sup> distribution in (a) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj and (c) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and the |p<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup>|/E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in (d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj. The contributing m<sub>ll</sub><sup>min</sup> mass bins within each SR<sup>offWZ</sup> category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Observed (N<sub>obs</sub>) yields after the discovery-fit and expected (N<sub>exp</sub>) after the background-only fit, for the inclusive SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The third and fourth column list the 95 CL upper limits on the visible cross-section (σ<sub>vis</sub><sup>95</sup>) and on the number of signal events (S<sub>obs</sub><sup>95</sup>). The fifth column (S<sub>exp</sub><sup>95</sup>) shows the 95 CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number (and ± 1σ excursions on the expectation) of background events. The last two columns indicate the CLb value, i.e. the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis, and the discovery p-value (p(s = 0)). If the observed yield is below the expected yield, the p-value is capped at 0.5.
Observed (N<sub>obs</sub>) yields after the discovery-fit and expected (N<sub>exp</sub>) after the background-only fit, for the inclusive SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The third and fourth column list the 95 CL upper limits on the visible cross-section (σ<sub>vis</sub><sup>95</sup>) and on the number of signal events (S<sub>obs</sub><sup>95</sup>). The fifth column (S<sub>exp</sub><sup>95</sup>) shows the 95 CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number (and ± 1σ excursions on the expectation) of background events. The last two columns indicate the CLb value, i.e. the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis, and the discovery p-value (p(s = 0)). If the observed yield is below the expected yield, the p-value is capped at 0.5.
Observed (N<sub>obs</sub>) yields after the discovery-fit and expected (N<sub>exp</sub>) after the background-only fit, for the inclusive SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The third and fourth column list the 95 CL upper limits on the visible cross section (σ<sub>vis</sub><sup>95</sup>) and on the number of signal events (S<sub>obs</sub><sup>95</sup>). The fifth column (S<sub>exp</sub><sup>95</sup>) shows the 95 CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number (and ± 1σ excursions on the expectation) of background events. The last two columns indicate the CLb value, i.e. the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis, and the discovery p-value (p(s = 0)). If the observed yield is below the expected yield, the p-value is capped at 0.5.
Observed (N<sub>obs</sub>) yields after the discovery-fit and expected (N<sub>exp</sub>) after the background-only fit, for the inclusive SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The third and fourth column list the 95 CL upper limits on the visible cross section (σ<sub>vis</sub><sup>95</sup>) and on the number of signal events (S<sub>obs</sub><sup>95</sup>). The fifth column (S<sub>exp</sub><sup>95</sup>) shows the 95 CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number (and ± 1σ excursions on the expectation) of background events. The last two columns indicate the CLb value, i.e. the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis, and the discovery p-value (p(s = 0)). If the observed yield is below the expected yield, the p-value is capped at 0.5.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the CRs and VRs of the RJR selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the CRs and VRs of the RJR selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in the SRs for the RJR selection. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in the SRs for the RJR selection. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p<sub>T</sub><sup>ℓ<sub>1</sub></sup> and (b) H<sup>PP</sup><sub>3,1</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p<sup>CM</sup><sub>T ISR</sub> and (d) R<sub>ISR</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p<sub>T</sub><sup>ℓ<sub>1</sub></sup> and (b) H<sup>PP</sup><sub>3,1</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p<sup>CM</sup><sub>T ISR</sub> and (d) R<sub>ISR</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p<sub>T</sub><sup>ℓ<sub>1</sub></sup> and (b) H<sup>PP</sup><sub>3,1</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p<sup>CM</sup><sub>T ISR</sub> and (d) R<sub>ISR</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p<sub>T</sub><sup>ℓ<sub>1</sub></sup> and (b) H<sup>PP</sup><sub>3,1</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p<sup>CM</sup><sub>T ISR</sub> and (d) R<sub>ISR</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p<sub>T</sub><sup>ℓ<sub>1</sub></sup> and (b) H<sup>PP</sup><sub>3,1</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p<sup>CM</sup><sub>T ISR</sub> and (d) R<sub>ISR</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p<sub>T</sub><sup>ℓ<sub>1</sub></sup> and (b) H<sup>PP</sup><sub>3,1</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p<sup>CM</sup><sub>T ISR</sub> and (d) R<sub>ISR</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p<sub>T</sub><sup>ℓ<sub>1</sub></sup> and (b) H<sup>PP</sup><sub>3,1</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p<sup>CM</sup><sub>T ISR</sub> and (d) R<sub>ISR</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p<sub>T</sub><sup>ℓ<sub>1</sub></sup> and (b) H<sup>PP</sup><sub>3,1</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p<sup>CM</sup><sub>T ISR</sub> and (d) R<sub>ISR</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
{Results of the discovery-fit for the SRs of the RJR selection, calculated using pseudo-experiments.} The first and second column list the 95 CL upper limits on the visible cross section (σ<sub>vis</sub><sup>95</sup>) and on the number of signal events (S<sub>obs</sub><sup>95</sup>). The third column (S<sub>exp</sub><sup>95</sup>) shows the 95 CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number (and ± 1σ excursions on the expectation) of background events. The last two columns indicate the CLb value, i.e. the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis, and the discovery p-value (p(s = 0)). If the observed yield is below the expected yield, the p-value is capped at 0.5. vspace{0.5em}
{Results of the discovery-fit for the SRs of the RJR selection, calculated using pseudo-experiments.} The first and second column list the 95 CL upper limits on the visible cross section (σ<sub>vis</sub><sup>95</sup>) and on the number of signal events (S<sub>obs</sub><sup>95</sup>). The third column (S<sub>exp</sub><sup>95</sup>) shows the 95 CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number (and ± 1σ excursions on the expectation) of background events. The last two columns indicate the CLb value, i.e. the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis, and the discovery p-value (p(s = 0)). If the observed yield is below the expected yield, the p-value is capped at 0.5. vspace{0.5em}
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$-mediated model, for the wino/bino (+) scenario, as in Figure 17. The black numbers represent the observed (a,c,e,g) and expected (b,d,f,h) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$-mediated model, for the wino/bino (+) scenario, as in Figure 17. The black numbers represent the observed (a,c,e,g) and expected (b,d,f,h) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$-mediated model, for the wino/bino (+) scenario, as in Figure 17. The black numbers represent the observed (a,c,e,g) and expected (b,d,f,h) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$-mediated model, for the wino/bino (+) scenario, as in Figure 17. The black numbers represent the observed (a,c,e,g) and expected (b,d,f,h) upper cross-section limits.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>nj</sub> regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>nj</sub> regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>nj</sub> regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>nj</sub> regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>nj</sub> regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>nj</sub> regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>nj</sub> regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>nj</sub> regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
Summary of onshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (300,200) GeV and m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (600,100) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal points, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks per inclusive regions, and then further for each SR. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5.
Summary of onshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (300,200) GeV and m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (600,100) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal points, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks per inclusive regions, and then further for each SR. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5.
Summary of $W\!h$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (190,60) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks per inclusive regions, and then further for each SR. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5.
Summary of $W\!h$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (190,60) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks per inclusive regions, and then further for each SR. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (250,235) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (250,235) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (125,85) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (125,85) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (250,170) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (250,170) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (250,235) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (-) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (250,235) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (-) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (125,85) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (-) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (125,85) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (-) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (250,170) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (-) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (250,170) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (-) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (120,100) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the higgsino interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (120,100) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the higgsino interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (100,40) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the higgsino interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (100,40) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the higgsino interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (185,125) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the higgsino interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (185,125) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the higgsino interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
A search for new phenomena has been performed in final states with at least one isolated high-momentum photon, jets and missing transverse momentum in proton--proton collisions at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV. The data, collected by the ATLAS experiment at the CERN LHC, correspond to an integrated luminosity of 139 $fb^{-1}$. The experimental results are interpreted in a supersymmetric model in which pair-produced gluinos decay into neutralinos, which in turn decay into a gravitino, at least one photon, and jets. No significant deviations from the predictions of the Standard Model are observed. Upper limits are set on the visible cross section due to physics beyond the Standard Model, and lower limits are set on the masses of the gluinos and neutralinos, all at 95% confidence level. Visible cross sections greater than 0.022 fb are excluded and pair-produced gluinos with masses up to 2200 GeV are excluded for most of the NLSP masses investigated.
The observed and expected (post-fit) yields in the control and validation regions. The lower panel shows the difference in standard deviations between the observed and expected yields, considering both the systematic and statistical uncertainties on the background expectation.
Observed (points with error bars) and expected background (solid histograms) distributions for $E_{T}^{miss}$ in the signal region (a) SRL, (b) SRM and (c) SRH after the background-only fit applied to the CRs. The predicted signal distributions for the two models with a gluino mass of 2000 GeV and neutralino mass of 250 GeV (SRL), 1050 GeV (SRM) or 1950 GeV (SRH) are also shown for comparison. The uncertainties in the SM background are only statistical.
Observed (points with error bars) and expected background (solid histograms) distributions for $E_{T}^{miss}$ in the signal region (a) SRL, (b) SRM and (c) SRH after the background-only fit applied to the CRs. The predicted signal distributions for the two models with a gluino mass of 2000 GeV and neutralino mass of 250 GeV (SRL), 1050 GeV (SRM) or 1950 GeV (SRH) are also shown for comparison. The uncertainties in the SM background are only statistical.
Observed (points with error bars) and expected background (solid histograms) distributions for $E_{T}^{miss}$ in the signal region (a) SRL, (b) SRM and (c) SRH after the background-only fit applied to the CRs. The predicted signal distributions for the two models with a gluino mass of 2000 GeV and neutralino mass of 250 GeV (SRL), 1050 GeV (SRM) or 1950 GeV (SRH) are also shown for comparison. The uncertainties in the SM background are only statistical.
Observed and expected exclusion limit in the gluino-neutralino mass plane at 95% CL combined using the signal region with the best expected sensitivity at each point, for the full Run-2 dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of $139~\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$, for $\gamma/Z$ (a) and $\gamma/h$ (b) signal models. The black solid line corresponds to the expected limits at 95% CL, with the light (yellow) bands indicating the 1$\sigma$ exclusions due to experimental and background-theory uncertainties. The observed limits are indicated by medium (red) curves, the solid contour represents the nominal limit, and the dotted lines are obtained by varying the signal cross section by the theoretical scale and PDF uncertainties. For each point in the higgsino-bino parameter space, the labels indicate the best-expected signal region, where L, M and H mean SRL, SRM and SRH, respectively.
Observed and expected exclusion limit in the gluino-neutralino mass plane at 95% CL combined using the signal region with the best expected sensitivity at each point, for the full Run-2 dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of $139~\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$, for $\gamma/Z$ (a) and $\gamma/h$ (b) signal models. The black solid line corresponds to the expected limits at 95% CL, with the light (yellow) bands indicating the 1$\sigma$ exclusions due to experimental and background-theory uncertainties. The observed limits are indicated by medium (red) curves, the solid contour represents the nominal limit, and the dotted lines are obtained by varying the signal cross section by the theoretical scale and PDF uncertainties. For each point in the higgsino-bino parameter space, the labels indicate the best-expected signal region, where L, M and H mean SRL, SRM and SRH, respectively.
Acceptance (left) and efficiency (right) for the $\gamma/Z$ model signal grid for SRL (top), SRM (middle) and SRH (bottom).
Acceptance (left) and efficiency (right) for the $\gamma/Z$ model signal grid for SRL (top), SRM (middle) and SRH (bottom).
Acceptance (left) and efficiency (right) for the $\gamma/Z$ model signal grid for SRL (top), SRM (middle) and SRH (bottom).
Acceptance (left) and efficiency (right) for the $\gamma/Z$ model signal grid for SRL (top), SRM (middle) and SRH (bottom).
Acceptance (left) and efficiency (right) for the $\gamma/Z$ model signal grid for SRL (top), SRM (middle) and SRH (bottom).
Acceptance (left) and efficiency (right) for the $\gamma/Z$ model signal grid for SRL (top), SRM (middle) and SRH (bottom).
Acceptance (left) and efficiency (right) for the $\gamma/h$ model signal grid for SRL (top), SRM (middle) and SRH (bottom).
Acceptance (left) and efficiency (right) for the $\gamma/h$ model signal grid for SRL (top), SRM (middle) and SRH (bottom).
Acceptance (left) and efficiency (right) for the $\gamma/h$ model signal grid for SRL (top), SRM (middle) and SRH (bottom).
Acceptance (left) and efficiency (right) for the $\gamma/h$ model signal grid for SRL (top), SRM (middle) and SRH (bottom).
Acceptance (left) and efficiency (right) for the $\gamma/h$ model signal grid for SRL (top), SRM (middle) and SRH (bottom).
Acceptance (left) and efficiency (right) for the $\gamma/h$ model signal grid for SRL (top), SRM (middle) and SRH (bottom).
Cutflow for the SRL selection, for two relevant signal points for both $\gamma/Z$ and $\gamma/h$ models, where the gluinos have mass of 2000 GeV and the neutralinos have a mass of 250 GeV (10000 generated events). The numbers are normalized to a luminosity of 139 $fb^{-1}$.
Cutflow for the SRM selection, for two relevant signal points for both $\gamma/Z$ and $\gamma/h$ models, where the gluinos have mass of 2000 GeV and the neutralinos have a mass of 1050 GeV (10000 generated events). The numbers are normalized to a luminosity of 139 $fb^{-1}$.
Cutflow for the SRH selection, for two relevant signal points for both $\gamma/Z$ and $\gamma/h$ models, where the gluinos have mass of 2000 GeV and the neutralinos have a mass of 1950 GeV (10000 generated events). The numbers are normalized to a luminosity of 139 $fb^{-1}$.
Observed and expected exclusion limits in the gluino–neutralino mass plane at 95% CL for the full Run-2 dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb−1 , for the (a) $\gamma/Z$ and (b) $\gamma/h$ signal models. They are obtained by combining limits from the signal region with the best expected sensitivity at each point. The dashed (black) line corresponds to the expected limits at 95% CL, with the light (yellow) band indicating the $\pm 1\sigma$ excursions due to experimental and background-theory uncertainties. The observed limits are indicated by medium (red) curves: the solid contour represents the nominal limit, and the dotted lines are obtained by varying the signal cross section by the theoretical scale and PDF uncertainties.
Observed and expected exclusion limits in the gluino–neutralino mass plane at 95% CL for the full Run-2 dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb−1 , for the (a) $\gamma/Z$ and (b) $\gamma/h$ signal models. They are obtained by combining limits from the signal region with the best expected sensitivity at each point. The dashed (black) line corresponds to the expected limits at 95% CL, with the light (yellow) band indicating the $\pm 1\sigma$ excursions due to experimental and background-theory uncertainties. The observed limits are indicated by medium (red) curves: the solid contour represents the nominal limit, and the dotted lines are obtained by varying the signal cross section by the theoretical scale and PDF uncertainties.
Observed and expected exclusion limits in the gluino–neutralino mass plane at 95% CL for the full Run-2 dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb−1 , for the (a) $\gamma/Z$ and (b) $\gamma/h$ signal models. They are obtained by combining limits from the signal region with the best expected sensitivity at each point. The dashed (black) line corresponds to the expected limits at 95% CL, with the light (yellow) band indicating the $\pm 1\sigma$ excursions due to experimental and background-theory uncertainties. The observed limits are indicated by medium (red) curves: the solid contour represents the nominal limit, and the dotted lines are obtained by varying the signal cross section by the theoretical scale and PDF uncertainties.
Observed and expected exclusion limits in the gluino–neutralino mass plane at 95% CL for the full Run-2 dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb−1 , for the (a) $\gamma/Z$ and (b) $\gamma/h$ signal models. They are obtained by combining limits from the signal region with the best expected sensitivity at each point. The dashed (black) line corresponds to the expected limits at 95% CL, with the light (yellow) band indicating the $\pm 1\sigma$ excursions due to experimental and background-theory uncertainties. The observed limits are indicated by medium (red) curves: the solid contour represents the nominal limit, and the dotted lines are obtained by varying the signal cross section by the theoretical scale and PDF uncertainties.
Observed and expected exclusion limits in the gluino–neutralino mass plane at 95% CL for the full Run-2 dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb−1 , for the (a) $\gamma/Z$ and (b) $\gamma/h$ signal models. They are obtained by combining limits from the signal region with the best expected sensitivity at each point. The dashed (black) line corresponds to the expected limits at 95% CL, with the light (yellow) band indicating the $\pm 1\sigma$ excursions due to experimental and background-theory uncertainties. The observed limits are indicated by medium (red) curves: the solid contour represents the nominal limit, and the dotted lines are obtained by varying the signal cross section by the theoretical scale and PDF uncertainties.
Observed and expected exclusion limits in the gluino–neutralino mass plane at 95% CL for the full Run-2 dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb−1 , for the (a) $\gamma/Z$ and (b) $\gamma/h$ signal models. They are obtained by combining limits from the signal region with the best expected sensitivity at each point. The dashed (black) line corresponds to the expected limits at 95% CL, with the light (yellow) band indicating the $\pm 1\sigma$ excursions due to experimental and background-theory uncertainties. The observed limits are indicated by medium (red) curves: the solid contour represents the nominal limit, and the dotted lines are obtained by varying the signal cross section by the theoretical scale and PDF uncertainties.
Observed and expected exclusion limits in the gluino–neutralino mass plane at 95% CL for the full Run-2 dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb−1 , for the (a) $\gamma/Z$ and (b) $\gamma/h$ signal models. They are obtained by combining limits from the signal region with the best expected sensitivity at each point. The dashed (black) line corresponds to the expected limits at 95% CL, with the light (yellow) band indicating the $\pm 1\sigma$ excursions due to experimental and background-theory uncertainties. The observed limits are indicated by medium (red) curves: the solid contour represents the nominal limit, and the dotted lines are obtained by varying the signal cross section by the theoretical scale and PDF uncertainties.
Observed and expected exclusion limits in the gluino–neutralino mass plane at 95% CL for the full Run-2 dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb−1 , for the (a) $\gamma/Z$ and (b) $\gamma/h$ signal models. They are obtained by combining limits from the signal region with the best expected sensitivity at each point. The dashed (black) line corresponds to the expected limits at 95% CL, with the light (yellow) band indicating the $\pm 1\sigma$ excursions due to experimental and background-theory uncertainties. The observed limits are indicated by medium (red) curves: the solid contour represents the nominal limit, and the dotted lines are obtained by varying the signal cross section by the theoretical scale and PDF uncertainties.
Observed and expected exclusion limits in the gluino–neutralino mass plane at 95% CL for the full Run-2 dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb−1 , for the (a) $\gamma/Z$ and (b) $\gamma/h$ signal models. They are obtained by combining limits from the signal region with the best expected sensitivity at each point. The dashed (black) line corresponds to the expected limits at 95% CL, with the light (yellow) band indicating the $\pm 1\sigma$ excursions due to experimental and background-theory uncertainties. The observed limits are indicated by medium (red) curves: the solid contour represents the nominal limit, and the dotted lines are obtained by varying the signal cross section by the theoretical scale and PDF uncertainties.
Observed and expected exclusion limits in the gluino–neutralino mass plane at 95% CL for the full Run-2 dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb−1 , for the (a) $\gamma/Z$ and (b) $\gamma/h$ signal models. They are obtained by combining limits from the signal region with the best expected sensitivity at each point. The dashed (black) line corresponds to the expected limits at 95% CL, with the light (yellow) band indicating the $\pm 1\sigma$ excursions due to experimental and background-theory uncertainties. The observed limits are indicated by medium (red) curves: the solid contour represents the nominal limit, and the dotted lines are obtained by varying the signal cross section by the theoretical scale and PDF uncertainties.
Observed and expected exclusion limits in the gluino–neutralino mass plane at 95% CL for the full Run-2 dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb−1 , for the (a) $\gamma/Z$ and (b) $\gamma/h$ signal models. They are obtained by combining limits from the signal region with the best expected sensitivity at each point. The dashed (black) line corresponds to the expected limits at 95% CL, with the light (yellow) band indicating the $\pm 1\sigma$ excursions due to experimental and background-theory uncertainties. The observed limits are indicated by medium (red) curves: the solid contour represents the nominal limit, and the dotted lines are obtained by varying the signal cross section by the theoretical scale and PDF uncertainties.
Observed and expected exclusion limits in the gluino–neutralino mass plane at 95% CL for the full Run-2 dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb−1 , for the (a) $\gamma/Z$ and (b) $\gamma/h$ signal models. They are obtained by combining limits from the signal region with the best expected sensitivity at each point. The dashed (black) line corresponds to the expected limits at 95% CL, with the light (yellow) band indicating the $\pm 1\sigma$ excursions due to experimental and background-theory uncertainties. The observed limits are indicated by medium (red) curves: the solid contour represents the nominal limit, and the dotted lines are obtained by varying the signal cross section by the theoretical scale and PDF uncertainties.
A search is reported for excited $\tau$-leptons and leptoquarks in events with two hadronically decaying $\tau$-leptons and two or more jets. The search uses proton-proton (pp) collision data at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV recorded by the ATLAS experiment during the Run 2 of the Large Hadron Collider in 2015-2018. The total integrated luminosity is 139 fb$^{-1}$. The excited $\tau$-lepton is assumed to be produced and to decay via a four-fermion contact interaction into an ordinary $\tau$-lepton and a quark-antiquark pair. The leptoquarks are assumed to be produced in pairs via the strong interaction, and each leptoquark is assumed to couple to a charm or lighter quark and a $\tau$-lepton. No excess over the background prediction is observed. Excited $\tau$-leptons with masses below 2.8 TeV are excluded at 95% CL in scenarios with the contact interaction scale $\Lambda$ set to 10 TeV. At the extreme limit of model validity where $\Lambda$ is set equal to the excited $\tau$-lepton mass, excited $\tau$-leptons with masses below 4.6 TeV are excluded. Leptoquarks with masses below 1.3 TeV are excluded at 95% CL if their branching ratio to a charm quark and a $\tau$-lepton equals 1. The analysis does not exploit flavour-tagging in the signal region.
Observed and expected upper 95% CL limit on the $\tau^\ast$ production cross-section as a function of $m_{\tau^\ast}$ for a fixed value of the contact interaction scale, $\Lambda = 10$ TeV.
Observed and expected lower 95% CL limit on the contact interaction scale $\Lambda$ as a function of $m_{\tau^\ast}$.
Observed and expected upper 95% CL limit on the LQ production cross-section as a function of $m_\mathrm{LQ}$. The LQ couples to a tau lepton and a c-quark. The limits are also valid for scenarios in which the LQ couples to lighter quarks.
Cutflow for two representative signal samples used in this analysis. The excited tau mass $m_{\tau^\ast} = 2.75$ TeV and the contact interaction scale $\Lambda=10$ TeV. The LQ mass $m_\mathrm{LQ} = 1.3$ TeV. The event yields include all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 139 fb$^{-1}$.
Acceptance x efficiency of the $\tau^\ast$ signal SR selection
Acceptance x efficiency of the LQ signal SR selection
When you search on a word, e.g. 'collisions', we will automatically search across everything we store about a record. But sometimes you may wish to be more specific. Here we show you how.
Guidance on the query string syntax can also be found in the OpenSearch documentation.
About HEPData Submitting to HEPData HEPData File Formats HEPData Coordinators HEPData Terms of Use HEPData Cookie Policy
Status
Email
Forum
Twitter
GitHub
Copyright ~1975-Present, HEPData | Powered by Invenio, funded by STFC, hosted and originally developed at CERN, supported and further developed at IPPP Durham.