Data minus non-Zjj backgrounds in the EW-enriched fiducial region, statistical errors included

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour (-1$\sigma$) for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The observed 95% CL exclusion contour for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.1, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0.1 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour (+1$\sigma$) for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.1, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0.1 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour (-1$\sigma$) for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.1, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0.1 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.1, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0.1 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The observed 95% CL exclusion contour for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving a vector operator with couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25, $g_{\chi}$ =1 and $g_{l}$ = 0 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour ($+1\sigma$) for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving a vector operator with couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25, $g_{\chi}$ =1 and $g_{l}$ = 0 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour ($-1\sigma$) for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving a vector operator with couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25, $g_{\chi}$ =1 and $g_{l}$ = 0 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving a vector operator with couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25, $g_{\chi}$ =1 and $g_{l}$ = 0 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The observed 95% CL exclusion contour for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving for a vector operator with couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.1, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0.01 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour ($+1\sigma$) for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving for a vector operator with couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.1, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0.01 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour ($-1\sigma$) for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving for a vector operator with couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.1, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0.01 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The expected 95% CL exclusion contour for a simplified model of dark-matter production involving for a vector operator with couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.1, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0.01 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$ and the mediator mass $m_{\mathrm{med}}$. The plane under the limit curve is excluded.

The 90% CL exclusion limit on the $\chi$-proton scattering cross section in a simplifed model of dark-matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$.

The 90% CL exclusion limit on the $\chi$-nucleon scattering cross section in a simplifed model of dark-matter production involving a vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25, $g_{\chi}$ = 1 and $g_{l}$ = 0 as a function of the dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$.

The observed and expected 95% CL limits on M* for a dimension-7 operator EFT model with a contact interaction of type $\gamma\gamma\chi\chi$ as a function of dark-matter mass $m_{\chi}$.

The observed and expected limit at 95% CL on the production cross section of a $Z\gamma$ resonance as a function of its mass.

The observed 95% CL upper limits on signal strength $\mu$, the ratio of the experimental limit to the predicted signal cross section, for a simplified model of dark matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$ = 0.25 and $g_{\chi}$ = 1 as a function of the DM and the mediator particle masses. The bound on $\mu$ only applies for choices of couplings that yield the same kinematic distributions as the benchmark model.

Acceptance, in %, for a simplified model of dark matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$= 0.25 and $g_{\chi}$ = 1 for various $m_{\chi}$ and $m_{\textrm{med}}$ values. It is constant as a function of $m_{\chi}$ for a fixed $m_{\textrm{med}}$ in the region $m_{\textrm{med}}>2m_{\chi}$.

Fiducial reconstruction efficiencies in the three inclusive signal regions for a simplified model of dark matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q}$= 0.25 and $g_{\chi}$ = 1 for various $m_{\chi}$ and $m_{\textrm{med}}$ values. It is constant as a function of $m_{\chi}$ for a fixed $m_{\textrm{med}}$ in the region $m_{\textrm{med}}>2m_{\chi}$.

Observed and predicted mTtot distribution in the b-tag category of the 2tau_h channel. Despite listing this as an exclusive final state (as there must be at least one b-jets), there is no explicit selection on the presence of additional light-flavour jets. Please note that the bin content is divided by the bin width in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table. The last bin includes overflows. The combined prediction for A and H bosons with masses of 300, 500 and 800 GeV and $\tan\beta$ = 10 in the hMSSM scenario are also provided.

Observed and predicted mTtot distribution for the b-inclusive selection in the 1l1tau_h channel. Please note that the bin content is divided by the bin width in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table. In the paper, the first bin is cut off at 60 GeV for aesthetics but contains underflows down to 50 GeV as in the HepData table. The last bin includes overflows. The prediction for a SSM Zprime with masses of 1500, 2000 and 2500 GeV are also provided.

Observed and predicted mTtot distribution for the b-inclusive selection in the 2tau_h channel. Please note that the bin content is divided by the bin width in the paper figure, but not in the HepData table. The last bin includes overflows. The prediction for a SSM Zprime with masses of 1500, 2000 and 2500 GeV are also provided.

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

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the Drell Yan production cross section times ditau branching fraction as a function of the Zprime boson mass.

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

Ratio of the 95% CL upper limits on the production cross section times branching fraction for alternate Zprime models with respect to the SSM, both observed and expected are shown.

Acceptance, acceptance times efficiency and b-tag category fraction for a scalar boson produced by gluon-gluon fusion as a function of the scalar boson mass.

Acceptance, acceptance times efficiency and b-tag category fraction for a scalar boson produced by b-associated production as a function of the scalar boson mass.

Acceptance and acceptance times efficiency for a heavy gauge boson produced by Drell Yan as a function of the gauge boson mass.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

Two dimensional likelihood scan of the gluon-gluon fusion cross section times braching fraction, $\sigma(gg\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$, vs the b-associated production times branching fraction, $\sigma(bb\phi)\times B(\phi\to\tau\tau)$ for the Higgs boson mass ($m_\phi$) indicated in the table. For each mass, 10000 points are scanned. At each point $\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ is calculated, defined as the negative-log-likelihood (NLL) of the conditional fit with $\sigma(gg\phi)$ and $\sigma(bb\phi)$ fixed to their values at the point and with the minimum NLL value at any point subtracted. Vaules are provided for the fit to the observed data and to the expected data, which is the sum of Standard Model contributions not including the SM Higgs boson. The best-fit point and the preferred 68% and 95% boundaries are found at $2\Delta(\mathrm{NLL})$ values of 0.0, 2.30 and 5.90, respectively.

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

$c_2\{4\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$c_2\{4\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $N_{ch}(p_T < 0.4 GeV)$ (EvSel_$N_{ch}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_2\{4\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $N_{ch}(p_T < 0.4 GeV)$ (EvSel_$N_{ch}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 13 TeV.

$c_2\{4\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $N_{ch}(p_T < 0.4 GeV)$ (EvSel_$N_{ch}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_2\{4\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $N_{ch}(p_T < 0.4 GeV)$ (EvSel_$N_{ch}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$=2.76 TeV.

$c_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 13 TeV.

$c_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2 \}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$c_2\{2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_2\{2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 13 TeV.

$c_2\{2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_2\{2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$c_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 13 TeV.

$c_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2 \}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$c_2\{4\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_2\{4\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 13 TeV.

$c_2\{4\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_2\{4\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$c_2\{6\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_2\{6\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$c_2\{6\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_2\{6\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$c_2\{8\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_2\{8\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$c_2\{8\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_2\{8\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 13 TeV.

$v_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2 \}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 13 TeV.

$v_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2 \}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_2\{4\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_2\{6\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_2\{8\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_2\{4\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_2\{6\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_2\{8\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_2\{4\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_2\{6\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_2\{8\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_2\{4\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_2\{6\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_2\{8\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_2\{4\}/v_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2 \}$ ratio for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_2\{6\}/v_2\{4\}$ ratio for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_2\{8\}/v_2\{6\}$ ratio for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_2\{4\}/v_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2 \}$ ratio for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_2\{6\}/v_2\{4\}$ ratio for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_2\{8\}/v_2\{6\}$ ratio for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_2\{4\}/v_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2 \}$ ratio for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_2\{6\}/v_2\{4\}$ ratio for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_2\{8\}/v_2\{6\}$ ratio for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_2\{4\}/v_2\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2 \}$ ratio for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_2\{6\}/v_2\{4\}$ ratio for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_2\{8\}/v_2\{6\}$ ratio for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$c_3\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_3\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 13 TeV.

$c_3\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_3\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2 \}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$c_3\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_3\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 13 TeV.

$c_3\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_3\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2 \}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$c_4\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_4\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 13 TeV.

$c_4\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_4\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2 \}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$c_4\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_4\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 13 TeV.

$c_4\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$c_4\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2 \}$ cumulants for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_3\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ harmonics for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 13 TeV.

$v_3\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ harmonics for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_3\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2 \}$ harmonics for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_3\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ harmonics for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_3\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2 \}$ harmonics for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_4\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ harmonics for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_4\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ harmonics for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 13 TeV.

$v_4\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ harmonics for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_4\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2 \}$ harmonics for reference particles with 0.3 $< p_T <$ 3.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$v_4\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ harmonics for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_4\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ harmonics for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$= 13 TeV.

$v_4\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2\}$ harmonics for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for pPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 5.02 TeV.

$v_4\{2, | \Delta \eta > 2 \}$ harmonics for reference particles with 0.5 $< p_T <$ 5.0 GeV selected according to $M_{ref}$ (EvSel_$M_{ref}$) for PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{ s_{NN} }$= 2.76 TeV.

$ v_2\{4\} $ harmonics for reference particles with 0.2 $ < p_{T} < $ 3.0 GeV as a function of $ < N_{ch}(|\eta|<1) > $ for p+Pb collisions at $ \sqrt{ s_{NN} } $= 5.02 TeV.

$ v_2\{4\} $ harmonics for reference particles with 0.2 $ < p_{T}< $ 3.0 GeV as a function of $ < N_{ch}(|\eta|<1) > $ for Pb+Pb collisions at $ \sqrt{ s_{NN} } $= 2.76 TeV.

rapidity bin 1.5 < |Y| < 2.0 anti-kt R=0.4

rapidity bin 2.0 < |Y| < 2.5 anti-kt R=0.4

rapidity bin 2.5 < |Y| < 3.0 anti-kt R=0.4

rapidity bin 0 < y* < 0.5 anti-kt R=0.4

rapidity bin 0.5 < y* < 1.0 anti-kt R=0.4

rapidity bin 1.0 < y* < 1.5 anti-kt R=0.4

rapidity bin 1.5 < y* < 2.0 anti-kt R=0.4

rapidity bin 2.0 < y* < 2.5 anti-kt R=0.4

rapidity bin 2.5 < y* < 3.0 anti-kt R=0.4

Number of expected Standard Model background events including total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature (calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure), number of observed events, and the observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the visible $\tau\nu$ production cross section, $\sigma_{\rm vis} = \sigma(pp \to \tau\nu +X) \cdot \mathcal{A} \cdot \varepsilon$, for $m_{\rm T}$ thresholds ranging from 250 to 1800 GeV. See HepData abstract for details on how to use this data for reinterpretation.

Number of expected Standard Model background events including total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature (calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure), number of observed events, and the observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the visible $\tau\nu$ production cross section, $\sigma_{\rm vis} = \sigma(pp \to \tau\nu +X) \cdot \mathcal{A} \cdot \varepsilon$, for $m_{\rm T}$ thresholds ranging from 250 to 1800 GeV. See HepData abstract for details on how to use this data for reinterpretation.

Number of expected Standard Model background events including total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature (calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure), number of observed events, and the observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the visible $\tau\nu$ production cross section, $\sigma_{\rm vis} = \sigma(pp \to \tau\nu +X) \cdot \mathcal{A} \cdot \varepsilon$, for $m_{\rm T}$ thresholds ranging from 250 to 1800 GeV. See HepData abstract for details on how to use this data for reinterpretation.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on cross section times $\tau\nu$ branching fraction for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on cross section times $\tau\nu$ branching fraction for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$.

Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on cross section times $\tau\nu$ branching fraction for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$.

Regions of the non-universal G(221) parameter space excluded at 95% CL.

Regions of the non-universal G(221) parameter space excluded at 95% CL.

Regions of the non-universal G(221) parameter space excluded at 95% CL.

Number of expected $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$, $W^{\prime}_{\rm NU}$, Standard Model background and observed events passing the optimal $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each considered signal mass hypothesis. The expectations include the total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature. The yields and uncertainties are calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure.

Number of expected $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$, $W^{\prime}_{\rm NU}$, Standard Model background and observed events passing the optimal $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each considered signal mass hypothesis. The expectations include the total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature. The yields and uncertainties are calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure.

Number of expected $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$, $W^{\prime}_{\rm NU}$, Standard Model background and observed events passing the optimal $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each considered signal mass hypothesis. The expectations include the total statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature. The yields and uncertainties are calculated before applying the statistical fitting procedure.

Acceptance for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at generator-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. The "selected tau" criteria include the requirement of a $\tau_{\rm had-vis}$ with $p_{\rm T}$ > 50 GeV and $|\eta|$ < 2.4. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.

Acceptance for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at generator-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. The "selected tau" criteria include the requirement of a $\tau_{\rm had-vis}$ with $p_{\rm T}$ > 50 GeV and $|\eta|$ < 2.4. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.

Acceptance for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at generator-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. The "selected tau" criteria include the requirement of a $\tau_{\rm had-vis}$ with $p_{\rm T}$ > 50 GeV and $|\eta|$ < 2.4. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.

Acceptance times efficiency for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at reconstruction-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. "Preselection" includes all criteria prior to those shown. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.

Acceptance times efficiency for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at reconstruction-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. "Preselection" includes all criteria prior to those shown. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.

Acceptance times efficiency for $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ as a function of the $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass, shown after successively applying selection at reconstruction-level. The acceptance times efficiency is calculated with respect to all $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM} \to \tau\nu$ events with a generated $\tau\nu$ mass above 120 GeV. "Preselection" includes all criteria prior to those shown. The $m_{\rm T}$ threshold for each $W^{\prime}_{\rm SSM}$ mass is defined in Table 5.

Reconstruction efficiency as a function of $m_{\rm T}$ (see HepData abstract for parameterization), defined as the ratio of the number of $\tau\nu$ events remaining after applying the full selection at reconstruction-level to those remaining after applying the fiducial selection at generator-level. The efficiency is largely model independent, with an uncertainty of ~10% due to model choice.

Reconstruction efficiency as a function of $m_{\rm T}$ (see HepData abstract for parameterization), defined as the ratio of the number of $\tau\nu$ events remaining after applying the full selection at reconstruction-level to those remaining after applying the fiducial selection at generator-level. The efficiency is largely model independent, with an uncertainty of ~10% due to model choice.

Reconstruction efficiency as a function of $m_{\rm T}$ (see HepData abstract for parameterization), defined as the ratio of the number of $\tau\nu$ events remaining after applying the full selection at reconstruction-level to those remaining after applying the fiducial selection at generator-level. The efficiency is largely model independent, with an uncertainty of ~10% due to model choice.

Covariance matrix of the relative cross-section as function of the top quark pT, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix for the absolute cross-section as function of the hadronic top-quark top quark pT, accounting for the statistic and systematic uncertainties in the boosted topology.

Covariance matrix for the absolute cross-section as function of the hadronic top-quark top quark pT, accounting for the statistic and systematic uncertainties in the boosted topology.

Covariance matrix for the relative cross-section as function of the hadronic top-quark top quark pT, accounting for the statistic and systematic uncertainties in the boosted topology.

Covariance matrix for the relative cross-section as function of the hadronic top-quark top quark pT, accounting for the statistic and systematic uncertainties in the boosted topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the top quark, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the top quark, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the relative cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the top quark, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the relative cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the top quark, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix for the absolute cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the top quark, accounting for the statistic and systematic uncertainties in the boosted topology.

Covariance matrix for the absolute cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the top quark, accounting for the statistic and systematic uncertainties in the boosted topology.

Covariance matrix for the relative cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the top quark, accounting for the statistic and systematic uncertainties in the boosted topology.

Covariance matrix for the relative cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the top quark, accounting for the statistic and systematic uncertainties in the boosted topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the mass of the tt̄ system, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the mass of the tt̄ system, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the relative cross-section as function of the mass of the tt̄ system, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the relative cross-section as function of the mass of the tt̄ system, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the tt̄ system pT, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the tt̄ system pT, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the relative cross-section as function of the tt̄ system pT, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the relative cross-section as function of the tt̄ system pT, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the tt̄ system, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the tt̄ system, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the tt̄ system, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the tt̄ system, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the top quark transverse momentum in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the top quark transverse momentum in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the top quark transverse momentum in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the top quark transverse momentum in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the top quark rapidity in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the top quark rapidity in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the top quark rapidity in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the top quark rapidity in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the tt̄ system transverse momentum in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the tt̄ system transverse momentum in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the tt̄ system transverse momentum in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the tt̄ system transverse momentum in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the tt̄ system rapidity in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the tt̄ system rapidity in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the tt̄ system rapidity in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the tt̄ system rapidity in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the mass of the tt̄ system in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the mass of the tt̄ system in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the mass of the tt̄ system in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the mass of the tt̄ system in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the top quark transverse momentum in the boosted regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the top quark transverse momentum in the boosted regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the top quark transverse momentum in the boosted regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the top quark transverse momentum in the boosted regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the top quark rapidity in the boosted regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the top quark rapidity in the boosted regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the top quark rapidity in the boosted regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the top quark rapidity in the boosted regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

The measured $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in the Z/$\gamma ^{*}$($\rightarrow \mu \mu$)+jets control region, for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV inclusive selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.

The measured leading jet $p_{T}$ distribution in the Z/$\gamma ^{*}$($\rightarrow \mu \mu$)+jets control region, for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV inclusive selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.

The measured $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in the top control region, for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV inclusive selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.

The measured leading jet $p_{T}$ distribution in the top control region, for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV inclusive selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.

Measured distribution of the $E_{T}^{miss}$ for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV selection compared to the SM predictions. The latter are normalized with normalization factors as determined by the global fit that considers exclusive $E_{T}^{miss}$ regions. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.

Measured distribution of the leading jet $p_{T}$ for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV selection compared to the SM predictions. The latter are normalized with normalization factors as determined by the global fit that considers exclusive $E_{T}^{miss}$ regions. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.

Measured distribution of the leading jet $|\eta|$ for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV selection compared to the SM predictions. The latter are normalized with normalization factors as determined by the global fit that considers exclusive $E_{T}^{miss}$ regions. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.

Measured distribution of the jet multiplicity for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV selection compared to the SM predictions. The latter are normalized with normalization factors as determined by the global fit that considers exclusive $E_{T}^{miss}$ regions. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.

The expected $95\%$ CL exclusion limit for a simplified model of dark matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q} = 0.25$ and $g_{\chi} = 1$ as a function of the assumed mediator mass m$_{Z_{A}}$ and the dark matter mass m$_{\chi}$.

The measured $E_{T}^{miss}$ distribution in the W($\rightarrow \mu \nu$)+jets control region, for the $E_{T}^{miss}$ > 250GeV inclusive selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit. The last bin of the distribution contains overflows.

The observed $95\%$ CL exclusion limit for a simplified model of dark matter production involving an axial-vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q} = 0.25$ and $g_{\chi} = 1$ as a function of the assumed mediator mass m$_{Z_{A}}$ and the dark matter mass m$_{\chi}$.

The observed $90\%$ CL exclusion limit on the spin-dependent WIMP–proton scattering cross section in the context of the simplified model with axial-vector couplings, assuming minimal mediator width and the coupling values $g_{q} = 0.25$ and $g_{\chi} = 1$.

The expected $95\%$ CL exclusion limit for a simplified model of dark matter production involving a vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q} = 0.25$ and $g_{\chi} = 1$ as a function of the assumed mediator mass m$_{Z_{V}}$ and the dark matter mass m$_{\chi}$.

The observed $95\%$ CL exclusion limit for a simplified model of dark matter production involving a vector operator, Dirac DM and couplings $g_{q} = 0.25$ and $g_{\chi} = 1$ as a function of the assumed mediator mass m$_{Z_{V}}$ and the dark matter mass m$_{\chi}$.

The expected and observed $95\%$ CL limits on the signal strength $\mu = \sigma^{95\% CL}/\sigma$ as a function of the mediator mass for a very light WIMP, in a model with spin-0 pseudoscalar mediator and $g_{q}=g_{\chi}=1.0$.

The expected and observed $95\%$ CL limits on the signal strength $\mu = \sigma^{95\% CL}/\sigma$ as a function of the WIMP mass for $m_{Z_{P}}=10$ GeV, in a model with spin-0 pseudoscalar mediator and $g_{q}=g_{\chi}=1.0$.

The expected exclusion contour at $95\%$ CL in the m$_{\eta}$–m$_{\chi}$ parameter plane for the coloured scalar mediator model, with minimal width and coupling set to $g=1$.

The observed exclusion contour at $95\%$ CL in the m$_{\eta}$–m$_{\chi}$ parameter plane for the coloured scalar mediator model, with minimal width and coupling set to $g=1$.

The expected excluded region at the $95\%$ CL in the ($\tilde{t}_{1}$,$\chi^{0}_{1}$) mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_{1} \rightarrow c + \chi^{0}_{1}$ (B = $100\%$).

The observed excluded region at the $95\%$ CL in the ($\tilde{t}_{1}$,$\chi^{0}_{1}$) mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_{1} \rightarrow c + \chi^{0}_{1}$ (B = $100\%$).

The expected excluded region at the $95\%$ CL in the ($\tilde{t}_{1}$,$\chi^{0}_{1}$) mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_{1} \rightarrow b + ff' + \chi^{0}_{1}$ (B = $100\%$).

The observed excluded region at the $95\%$ CL in the ($\tilde{t}_{1}$,$\chi^{0}_{1}$) mass plane for the decay channel $\tilde{t}_{1} \rightarrow b + ff' + \chi^{0}_{1}$ (B = $100\%$).

The expected exclusion plane at $95\%$ CL as a function of sbottom and neutralino masses for the decay channel $\tilde{b}_{1} \rightarrow b + \chi^{0}_{1}$ (B = $100\%$).

The observed exclusion plane at $95\%$ CL as a function of sbottom and neutralino masses for the decay channel $\tilde{b}_{1} \rightarrow b + \chi^{0}_{1}$ (B = $100\%$).

The expected exclusion region at $95\%$ CL as a function of squark mass and the squark-neutralino mass difference for $\tilde{q}_{1} → q + \chi^{0}_{1}$ (q =u,d,c,s).

The observed exclusion region at $95\%$ CL as a function of squark mass and the squark-neutralino mass difference for $\tilde{q}_{1} → q + \chi^{0}_{1}$ (q =u,d,c,s).

Expected and observed $95\%$ CL lower limits on the fundamental Planck scale in 4+n dimensions, M$_D$, as a function of the number of extra dimensions.

Expected and observed $95\%$ CL upper limit on the signal strength $\mu$ in the hypothesis of an axial-vector mediator, g$_{q}=0.25$, g$_{\chi}=1.0$ and minimal mediator width, as a function of the assumed mediator and DM masses.

Observed $90\%$ CL exclusion limit on the spin-dependent WIMP–neutron scattering cross section in the context of the simplified model with axial-vector couplings, assuming minimal mediator width and the coupling values $g_{q}=0.25$ and $g_{\chi}=1$.

Expected and observed $95\%$ CL upper limit on the signal strength $\mu$ in the hypothesis of a pseudoscalar mediator, $g_{q}=g_{\chi}=1.0$ and minimal mediator width, as a function of the assumed mediator and DM masses.