Displaced HNL search observed 95% confidence level exclusion contour in $|U_{\mu}|^2$ as a function of HNL mass (LNV case).

Prompt HNL search observed and expected 95% confidence level exclusion upper limits in $|U_{e}|^2$ as a function of HNL mass.

Prompt HNL search observed and expected 95% confidence level exclusion upper limits in $|U_{\mu}|^2$ as a function of HNL mass.

Displaced HNL search expected 95% confidence level exclusion contour in $|U_{\mu}|^2$ as a function of HNL mass (LNC case).

Displaced HNL search expected 95% confidence level exclusion contour in $|U_{\mu}|^2$ as a function of HNL mass (LNV case).

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction for the process $H \to 2\gamma_d + X$ with $m_H$ = 800 GeV in the hadron-hadron final state.

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction for the process $H \to 2\gamma_d + X$ with $m_H$ = 800 GeV in the muon-hadron final state.

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction for the process $H \to 4\gamma_d + X$ with $m_H$ = 800 GeV in the muon-muon final state.

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction for the process $H \to 4\gamma_d + X$ with $m_H$ = 800 GeV in the muon-hadron final state.

Upper limits at 95% CL on the cross section times branching fraction for the process $H \to 4\gamma_d + X$ with $m_H$ = 800 GeV in the hadron-hadron final state.

Extrapolated signal efficiencies as a function of proper decay length of the dark photon for the $H \to 4\gamma_d + X$ process with $m_H$ = 125 GeV in the muon-muon final state.

Extrapolated signal efficiencies as a function of proper decay length of the dark photon for the $H \to 2\gamma_d + X$ process with $m_H$ = 125 GeV in the muon-muon final state.

Extrapolated signal efficiencies as a function of proper decay length of the dark photon for the $H \to 2\gamma_d + X$ process with $m_H$ = 800 GeV in the muon-muon final state.

Extrapolated signal efficiencies as a function of proper decay length of the dark photon for the $H \to 4\gamma_d + X$ process with $m_H$ = 800 GeV in the muon-muon final state.

Extrapolated signal efficiencies as a function of proper decay length of the dark photon for the $H \to 4\gamma_d + X$ process with $m_H$ = 125 GeV in the muon-hadron final state.

Extrapolated signal efficiencies as a function of proper decay length of the dark photon for the $H \to 2\gamma_d + X$ process with $m_H$ = 125 GeV in the muon-hadron final state.

Extrapolated signal efficiencies as a function of proper decay length of the dark photon for the $H \to 2\gamma_d + X$ process with $m_H$ = 800 GeV in the muon-hadron final state.

Extrapolated signal efficiencies as a function of proper decay length of the dark photon for the $H \to 4\gamma_d + X$ process with $m_H$ = 800 GeV in the muon-hadron final state.

Extrapolated signal efficiencies as a function of proper decay length of the dark photon for the $H \to 2\gamma_d + X$ process with $m_H$ = 125 GeV in the hadron-hadron final state.

Extrapolated signal efficiencies as a function of proper decay length of the dark photon for the $H \to 2\gamma_d + X$ process with $m_H$ = 800 GeV in the hadron-hadron final state.

Extrapolated signal efficiencies as a function of proper decay length of the dark photon for the $H \to 4\gamma_d + X$ process with $m_H$ = 800 GeV in the hadron-hadron final state.

The measured fiducial cross section vs $E_{\mathrm{T}}^\gamma$. The central values are provided along with the statistical and systematic uncertainties together with the sign information. The statistical and "Uncor" uncertainty should be treated as uncorrelated bin-to-bin, while the rest are correlated between bins, and they are written as signed NP variations. The parton-to-particle correction factor $C_{theory}$ is the ratio of the cross-section predicted by Sherpa LO samples at particle level within the fiducial phase-space region defined in Table 4 to the predicted cross-section at parton level within the same fiducial region but with the smooth-cone isolation prescription defined above replacing the particle-level photon isolation criterion, and with Born-level leptons in place of dressed leptons. This correction should be applied on fixed order parton-level calculations. The systematic uncertainty is evaluated from a comparison with the correction factor obtained using events generated with Sherpa 2.2.2 at NLO. The uncertainty is defined as Max(stat error, systematic difference between Sherpa LO and Sherpa 2.2.2 NLO), and cannot be considered correlated bin-to-bin. In the case that the calculations are valid for dressed leptons, a modified correction factor excluding the Born-to-dressed lepton correction should be applied instead. This correction only takes into account the particle-level isolation criteria, and is provided separately here. The Sherpa 2.2.8 NLO cross-sections given below include a small contribution from EW $Z\gamma jj$ production.

The measured fiducial cross section vs $|\eta^\gamma|$. The central values are provided along with the statistical and systematic uncertainties together with the sign information. The statistical and "Uncor" uncertainty should be treated as uncorrelated bin-to-bin, while the rest are correlated between bins, and they are written as signed NP variations. The parton-to-particle correction factor $C_{theory}$ is the ratio of the cross-section predicted by Sherpa LO samples at particle level within the fiducial phase-space region defined in Table 4 to the predicted cross-section at parton level within the same fiducial region but with the smooth-cone isolation prescription defined above replacing the particle-level photon isolation criterion, and with Born-level leptons in place of dressed leptons. This correction should be applied on fixed order parton-level calculations. The systematic uncertainty is evaluated from a comparison with the correction factor obtained using events generated with SHERPA 2.2.2 at NLO. In the case that the calculations are valid for dressed leptons, a modified correction factor excluding the Born-to-dressed lepton correction should be applied instead. This correction only takes into account the particle-level isolation criteria, and is provided separately here. The Sherpa 2.2.8 NLO cross-sections given below include a small contribution from EW $Z\gamma jj$ production.

The measured fiducial cross section vs $|\eta^\gamma|$. The central values are provided along with the statistical and systematic uncertainties together with the sign information. The statistical and "Uncor" uncertainty should be treated as uncorrelated bin-to-bin, while the rest are correlated between bins, and they are written as signed NP variations. The parton-to-particle correction factor $C_{theory}$ is the ratio of the cross-section predicted by Sherpa LO samples at particle level within the fiducial phase-space region defined in Table 4 to the predicted cross-section at parton level within the same fiducial region but with the smooth-cone isolation prescription defined above replacing the particle-level photon isolation criterion, and with Born-level leptons in place of dressed leptons. This correction should be applied on fixed order parton-level calculations. The systematic uncertainty is evaluated from a comparison with the correction factor obtained using events generated with Sherpa 2.2.2 at NLO. The uncertainty is defined as Max(stat error, systematic difference between Sherpa LO and Sherpa 2.2.2 NLO), and cannot be considered correlated bin-to-bin. In the case that the calculations are valid for dressed leptons, a modified correction factor excluding the Born-to-dressed lepton correction should be applied instead. This correction only takes into account the particle-level isolation criteria, and is provided separately here. The Sherpa 2.2.8 NLO cross-sections given below include a small contribution from EW $Z\gamma jj$ production.

The measured fiducial cross section vs $m(\ell\ell\gamma)$. The central values are provided along with the statistical and systematic uncertainties together with the sign information. The statistical and "Uncor" uncertainty should be treated as uncorrelated bin-to-bin, while the rest are correlated between bins, and they are written as signed NP variations. The parton-to-particle correction factor $C_{theory}$ is the ratio of the cross-section predicted by Sherpa LO samples at particle level within the fiducial phase-space region defined in Table 4 to the predicted cross-section at parton level within the same fiducial region but with the smooth-cone isolation prescription defined above replacing the particle-level photon isolation criterion, and with Born-level leptons in place of dressed leptons. This correction should be applied on fixed order parton-level calculations. The systematic uncertainty is evaluated from a comparison with the correction factor obtained using events generated with SHERPA 2.2.2 at NLO. In the case that the calculations are valid for dressed leptons, a modified correction factor excluding the Born-to-dressed lepton correction should be applied instead. This correction only takes into account the particle-level isolation criteria, and is provided separately here. The Sherpa 2.2.8 NLO cross-sections given below include a small contribution from EW $Z\gamma jj$ production.

The measured fiducial cross section vs $m(\ell\ell\gamma)$. The central values are provided along with the statistical and systematic uncertainties together with the sign information. The statistical and "Uncor" uncertainty should be treated as uncorrelated bin-to-bin, while the rest are correlated between bins, and they are written as signed NP variations. The parton-to-particle correction factor $C_{theory}$ is the ratio of the cross-section predicted by Sherpa LO samples at particle level within the fiducial phase-space region defined in Table 4 to the predicted cross-section at parton level within the same fiducial region but with the smooth-cone isolation prescription defined above replacing the particle-level photon isolation criterion, and with Born-level leptons in place of dressed leptons. This correction should be applied on fixed order parton-level calculations. The systematic uncertainty is evaluated from a comparison with the correction factor obtained using events generated with Sherpa 2.2.2 at NLO. The uncertainty is defined as Max(stat error, systematic difference between Sherpa LO and Sherpa 2.2.2 NLO), and cannot be considered correlated bin-to-bin. In the case that the calculations are valid for dressed leptons, a modified correction factor excluding the Born-to-dressed lepton correction should be applied instead. This correction only takes into account the particle-level isolation criteria, and is provided separately here. The Sherpa 2.2.8 NLO cross-sections given below include a small contribution from EW $Z\gamma jj$ production.

The measured fiducial cross section vs $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell\ell\gamma}$. The central values are provided along with the statistical and systematic uncertainties together with the sign information. The statistical and "Uncor" uncertainty should be treated as uncorrelated bin-to-bin, while the rest are correlated between bins, and they are written as signed NP variations. The parton-to-particle correction factor $C_{theory}$ is the ratio of the cross-section predicted by Sherpa LO samples at particle level within the fiducial phase-space region defined in Table 4 to the predicted cross-section at parton level within the same fiducial region but with the smooth-cone isolation prescription defined above replacing the particle-level photon isolation criterion, and with Born-level leptons in place of dressed leptons. This correction should be applied on fixed order parton-level calculations. The systematic uncertainty is evaluated from a comparison with the correction factor obtained using events generated with SHERPA 2.2.2 at NLO. In the case that the calculations are valid for dressed leptons, a modified correction factor excluding the Born-to-dressed lepton correction should be applied instead. This correction only takes into account the particle-level isolation criteria, and is provided separately here. The Sherpa 2.2.8 NLO cross-sections given below include a small contribution from EW $Z\gamma jj$ production.

The measured fiducial cross section vs $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell\ell\gamma}$. The central values are provided along with the statistical and systematic uncertainties together with the sign information. The statistical and "Uncor" uncertainty should be treated as uncorrelated bin-to-bin, while the rest are correlated between bins, and they are written as signed NP variations. The parton-to-particle correction factor $C_{theory}$ is the ratio of the cross-section predicted by Sherpa LO samples at particle level within the fiducial phase-space region defined in Table 4 to the predicted cross-section at parton level within the same fiducial region but with the smooth-cone isolation prescription defined above replacing the particle-level photon isolation criterion, and with Born-level leptons in place of dressed leptons. This correction should be applied on fixed order parton-level calculations. The systematic uncertainty is evaluated from a comparison with the correction factor obtained using events generated with Sherpa 2.2.2 at NLO. The uncertainty is defined as Max(stat error, systematic difference between Sherpa LO and Sherpa 2.2.2 NLO), and cannot be considered correlated bin-to-bin. In the case that the calculations are valid for dressed leptons, a modified correction factor excluding the Born-to-dressed lepton correction should be applied instead. This correction only takes into account the particle-level isolation criteria, and is provided separately here. The Sherpa 2.2.8 NLO cross-sections given below include a small contribution from EW $Z\gamma jj$ production.

The measured fiducial cross section vs $\Delta\phi(ll,\gamma)$. The central values are provided along with the statistical and systematic uncertainties together with the sign information. The statistical and "Uncor" uncertainty should be treated as uncorrelated bin-to-bin, while the rest are correlated between bins, and they are written as signed NP variations. The parton-to-particle correction factor $C_{theory}$ is the ratio of the cross-section predicted by Sherpa LO samples at particle level within the fiducial phase-space region defined in Table 4 to the predicted cross-section at parton level within the same fiducial region but with the smooth-cone isolation prescription defined above replacing the particle-level photon isolation criterion, and with Born-level leptons in place of dressed leptons. This correction should be applied on fixed order parton-level calculations. The systematic uncertainty is evaluated from a comparison with the correction factor obtained using events generated with SHERPA 2.2.2 at NLO. In the case that the calculations are valid for dressed leptons, a modified correction factor excluding the Born-to-dressed lepton correction should be applied instead. This correction only takes into account the particle-level isolation criteria, and is provided separately here. The Sherpa 2.2.8 NLO cross-sections given below include a small contribution from EW $Z\gamma jj$ production.

The measured fiducial cross section vs $\Delta\phi(ll,\gamma)$. The central values are provided along with the statistical and systematic uncertainties together with the sign information. The statistical and "Uncor" uncertainty should be treated as uncorrelated bin-to-bin, while the rest are correlated between bins, and they are written as signed NP variations. The parton-to-particle correction factor $C_{theory}$ is the ratio of the cross-section predicted by Sherpa LO samples at particle level within the fiducial phase-space region defined in Table 4 to the predicted cross-section at parton level within the same fiducial region but with the smooth-cone isolation prescription defined above replacing the particle-level photon isolation criterion, and with Born-level leptons in place of dressed leptons. This correction should be applied on fixed order parton-level calculations. The systematic uncertainty is evaluated from a comparison with the correction factor obtained using events generated with Sherpa 2.2.2 at NLO. The uncertainty is defined as Max(stat error, systematic difference between Sherpa LO and Sherpa 2.2.2 NLO), and cannot be considered correlated bin-to-bin. In the case that the calculations are valid for dressed leptons, a modified correction factor excluding the Born-to-dressed lepton correction should be applied instead. This correction only takes into account the particle-level isolation criteria, and is provided separately here. The Sherpa 2.2.8 NLO cross-sections given below include a small contribution from EW $Z\gamma jj$ production.

The measured fiducial cross section vs $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell\ell\gamma}/m(\ell\ell\gamma)$. The central values are provided along with the statistical and systematic uncertainties together with the sign information. The statistical and "Uncor" uncertainty should be treated as uncorrelated bin-to-bin, while the rest are correlated between bins, and they are written as signed NP variations. The parton-to-particle correction factor $C_{theory}$ is the ratio of the cross-section predicted by Sherpa LO samples at particle level within the fiducial phase-space region defined in Table 4 to the predicted cross-section at parton level within the same fiducial region but with the smooth-cone isolation prescription defined above replacing the particle-level photon isolation criterion, and with Born-level leptons in place of dressed leptons. This correction should be applied on fixed order parton-level calculations. The systematic uncertainty is evaluated from a comparison with the correction factor obtained using events generated with SHERPA 2.2.2 at NLO. In the case that the calculations are valid for dressed leptons, a modified correction factor excluding the Born-to-dressed lepton correction should be applied instead. This correction only takes into account the particle-level isolation criteria, and is provided separately here. The Sherpa 2.2.8 NLO cross-sections given below include a small contribution from EW $Z\gamma jj$ production.

The measured fiducial cross section vs $p_{\mathrm{T}}^{\ell\ell\gamma}/m(\ell\ell\gamma)$. The central values are provided along with the statistical and systematic uncertainties together with the sign information. The statistical and "Uncor" uncertainty should be treated as uncorrelated bin-to-bin, while the rest are correlated between bins, and they are written as signed NP variations. The parton-to-particle correction factor $C_{theory}$ is the ratio of the cross-section predicted by Sherpa LO samples at particle level within the fiducial phase-space region defined in Table 4 to the predicted cross-section at parton level within the same fiducial region but with the smooth-cone isolation prescription defined above replacing the particle-level photon isolation criterion, and with Born-level leptons in place of dressed leptons. This correction should be applied on fixed order parton-level calculations. The systematic uncertainty is evaluated from a comparison with the correction factor obtained using events generated with Sherpa 2.2.2 at NLO. The uncertainty is defined as Max(stat error, systematic difference between Sherpa LO and Sherpa 2.2.2 NLO), and cannot be considered correlated bin-to-bin. In the case that the calculations are valid for dressed leptons, a modified correction factor excluding the Born-to-dressed lepton correction should be applied instead. This correction only takes into account the particle-level isolation criteria, and is provided separately here. The Sherpa 2.2.8 NLO cross-sections given below include a small contribution from EW $Z\gamma jj$ production.

Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton |eta|. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb). The corresponding correlation matrices are given in Tables 29 and 30.

Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton pT. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb). The last bin includes overflow beyond the upper bin boundary. The corresponding correlation matrices are given in Tables 31 and 32.

Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton pT. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb). The last bin includes overflow beyond the upper bin boundary. The corresponding correlation matrices are given in Tables 33 and 34.

Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton invariant mass. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb). The last bin includes overflow beyond the upper bin boundary. The corresponding correlation matrices are given in Tables 35 and 36.

Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton invariant mass. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb). The last bin includes overflow beyond the upper bin boundary. The corresponding correlation matrices are given in Tables 37 and 38.

Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton |rapidity|. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb). The corresponding correlation matrices are given in Tables 39 and 40.

Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton |rapidity|. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb). The corresponding correlation matrices are given in Tables 41 and 42.

Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the azimuthal angle between the leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb). The corresponding correlation matrices are given in Tables 43 and 44.

Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the azimuthal angle between the leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb). The corresponding correlation matrices are given in Tables 45 and 46.

Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of pT of the two leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb). The last bin includes overflow beyond the upper bin boundary. The corresponding correlation matrices are given in Tables 47 and 48.

Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of pT of the two leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb). The last bin includes overflow beyond the upper bin boundary. The corresponding correlation matrices are given in Tables 49 and 50.

Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of the energies of the two leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb). The last bin includes overflow beyond the upper bin boundary. The corresponding correlation matrices are given in Tables 51 and 52.

Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of the energies of the two leptons. The first column gives the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays, the second without. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb). The last bin includes overflow beyond the upper bin boundary. The corresponding correlation matrices are given in Tables 53 and 54.

Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton |eta| and dilepton invariant mass. The first four columns give the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays in the four mass bins, and the last four columns do not include the leptonic tau contributions. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).

Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton |eta| and dilepton invariant mass. The first four columns give the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays in the four mass bins, and the last four columns do not include the leptonic tau contributions. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).

Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton |rapidity| and dilepton invariant mass. The first four columns give the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays in the four mass bins, and the last four columns do not include the leptonic tau contributions. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).

Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton |rapidity| and dilepton invariant mass. The first four columns give the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays in the four mass bins, and the last four columns do not include the leptonic tau contributions. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).

Absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the azimuthal angle between the leptons and dilepton invariant mass. The first four columns give the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays in the four mass bins, and the last four columns do not include the leptonic tau contributions. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).

Normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the azimuthal angle between the leptons and dilepton invariant mass. The first four columns give the cross-section including contributions from leptonic tau decays in the four mass bins, and the last four columns do not include the leptonic tau contributions. Systematic uncertainties are given for ttbar modelling (ttmod), lepton calibration (lept), jet and b-tagging calibration (jet), backgrounds (bkg) and integrated luminosity and beam energy (leb).

Correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton pT as measured in Table 1, including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton pT as measured in Table 1, not including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton pT as measured in Table 2, including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton pT as measured in Table 2, not including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton |eta| as measured in Table 3, including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton |eta| as measured in Table 3, not including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton |eta| as measured in Table 4, including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of lepton |eta| as measured in Table 4, not including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton pT as measured in Table 5, including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton pT as measured in Table 5, not including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton pT as measured in Table 6, including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton pT as measured in Table 6, not including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton invariant mass as measured in Table 7, including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton invariant mass as measured in Table 7, not including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton invariant mass as measured in Table 8, including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton invariant mass as measured in Table 8, not including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton |rapidity| as measured in Table 9, including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton |rapidity| as measured in Table 9, not including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton |rapidity| as measured in Table 10, including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of dilepton |rapidity| as measured in Table 10, not including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the azimuthal angle between the leptons as measured in Table 11, including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the azimuthal angle between the leptons as measured in Table 11, not including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the azimuthal angle between the leptons as measured in Table 12, including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the azimuthal angle between the leptons as measured in Table 12, not including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of pT of the two leptons as measured in Table 13, including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of pT of the two leptons as measured in Table 13, not including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of pT of the two leptons as measured in Table 14, including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of pT of the two leptons as measured in Table 14, not including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of the energies of the two leptons as measured in Table 15, including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the absolute differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of the energies of the two leptons as measured in Table 15, not including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of the energies of the two leptons as measured in Table 16, including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the normalised differential cross-section in the fiducial region as a function of the sum of the energies of the two leptons as measured in Table 16, not including tau decay contributions.

Correlation matrix for the combination of all eight one-dimensional absolute fiducial cross-section measurements, including tau decay contributions. The observables are arranged as follows: lepton pT (bins 1-11),lepton |eta| (bins 12-20),dilepton pT (bins 21-29),dilepton invariant mass (bins 30-41),dilepton |rapidity| (bins 42-50),the azimuthal angle between the leptons (bins 51-60),the sum of pT of the two leptons (bins 61-68),the sum of the energies of the two leptons (bins 69-78).

Correlation matrix for the combination of all eight one-dimensional absolute fiducial cross-section measurements, not including tau decay contributions. The observables are arranged as follows: lepton pT (bins 1-11),lepton |eta| (bins 12-20),dilepton pT (bins 21-29),dilepton invariant mass (bins 30-41),dilepton |rapidity| (bins 42-50),the azimuthal angle between the leptons (bins 51-60),the sum of pT of the two leptons (bins 61-68),the sum of the energies of the two leptons (bins 69-78).

Correlation matrix for the combination of all eight one-dimensional normalised fiducial cross-section measurements, including tau decay contributions. The observables are arranged as follows: lepton pT (bins 1-10),lepton |eta| (bins 11-18),dilepton pT (bins 19-26),dilepton invariant mass (bins 27-37),dilepton |rapidity| (bins 38-45),the azimuthal angle between the leptons (bins 46-54),the sum of pT of the two leptons (bins 55-61),the sum of the energies of the two leptons (bins 62-70).

Correlation matrix for the combination of all eight one-dimensional normalised fiducial cross-section measurements, not including tau decay contributions. The observables are arranged as follows: lepton pT (bins 1-10),lepton |eta| (bins 11-18),dilepton pT (bins 19-26),dilepton invariant mass (bins 27-37),dilepton |rapidity| (bins 38-45),the azimuthal angle between the leptons (bins 46-54),the sum of pT of the two leptons (bins 55-61),the sum of the energies of the two leptons (bins 62-70).

Fiducial region definition

Observed $CL_S$ limits on $\sigma \times BR$ for $m_{\Phi} = 200-400$ GeV.

Observed $CL_S$ limits on $\sigma \times BR$ for $m_{\Phi} = 600-1000$ GeV.

Combined limits from this analysis (ID) and the CR and MS analyses for $m_{H} = 125$ GeV, $m_s = 15$ GeV.

Combined limits from this analysis (ID) and the CR and MS analyses for $m_{H} = 125$ GeV, $m_s = 25$ GeV.

Combined limits from this analysis (ID) and the CR and MS analyses for $m_{H} = 125$ GeV, $m_s = 40$ GeV.

Combined limits from this analysis (ID) and the CR and MS analyses for $m_{H} = 125$ GeV, $m_s = 55$ GeV.

Combined limits from this analysis (ID) and the CR and MS analyses for $m_{\Phi} = 200$ GeV, $m_s = 25$ GeV.

Combined limits from this analysis (ID) and the CR and MS analyses for $m_{\Phi} = 200$ GeV, $m_s = 50$ GeV.

Comparison of the IDVx reconstruction and selection efficiency for a Higgs with a mass of 125 GeV decaying to an LLP with a mass of 8 GeV, using only standard tracking versus using standard and large radius tracking for all ID vertices in the signal MC sample.

Comparison of the IDVx reconstruction and selection efficiency for a Higgs with a mass of 125 GeV decaying to an LLP with a mass of 8 GeV, using only standard tracking versus using standard and large radius tracking for ID vertices passing the full IDVx selection criteria.

Comparison of the IDVx reconstruction and selection efficiency for a $\Phi$ with a mass of 1000 GeV decaying to an LLP with a mass of 150 GeV, using only standard tracking versus using standard and large radius tracking for all ID vertices in the signal MC sample.

Comparison of the IDVx reconstruction and selection efficiency for a $\Phi$ with a mass of 1000 GeV decaying to an LLP with a mass of 150 GeV, using only standard tracking versus using standard and large radius tracking for ID vertices passing the full IDVx selection criteria.

The IDVx selection efficiency as a function of long-lived particle decay $z$ position for MC signal samples with a 125 GeV Higgs boson decaying to LLPs with masses of 8, 25, and 55 GeV. The efficiency for the 55 GeV LLP sample is shown both with and without the material veto applied.

The IDVx selection efficiency as a function of long-lived particle decay $z$ position for MC signal samples with mediators of masses 200, 400, and 600 GeV decaying to LLPs with a mass of 50 GeV. The efficiency for the 200 GeV mediator sample is shown both with and without the material veto applied.

The impact of the IDVx selections on the selection efficiency for the MC signal sample with a Higgs with a mass of 125 GeV decaying to an LLP with a mass of 8 GeV.

The impact of the IDVx selections on the selection efficiency for the MC signal sample with a Higgs with a mass of 125 GeV decaying to an LLP with a mass of 8 GeV.

The impact of the IDVx selections on the selection efficiency for the MC signal sample with a Higgs with a mass of 125 GeV decaying to an LLP with a mass of 8 GeV.

The impact of the IDVx selections on the selection efficiency for the MC signal sample with a $\Phi$ with a mass of 400 GeV decaying to an LLP with a mass of 50 GeV.

The impact of the IDVx selections on the selection efficiency for the MC signal sample with a $\Phi$ with a mass of 400 GeV decaying to an LLP with a mass of 50 GeV.

The impact of the IDVx selections on the selection efficiency for the MC signal sample with a $\Phi$ with a mass of 400 GeV decaying to an LLP with a mass of 50 GeV.

The impact of the IDVx selections on the selection efficiency for the MC signal sample with a $\Phi$ with a mass of 1000 GeV decaying to an LLP with a mass of 150 GeV.

The impact of the IDVx selections on the selection efficiency for the MC signal sample with a $\Phi$ with a mass of 1000 GeV decaying to an LLP with a mass of 150 GeV.

The impact of the IDVx selections on the selection efficiency for the MC signal sample with a $\Phi$ with a mass of 1000 GeV decaying to an LLP with a mass of 150 GeV.

$CL_S$ limits on $B_{H\rightarrow ss}$ for $m_{H} = 125$ GeV, $m_s = 8$ GeV.

$CL_S$ limits on $B_{H\rightarrow ss}$ for $m_{H} = 125$ GeV, $m_s = 15$ GeV.

$CL_S$ limits on $B_{H\rightarrow ss}$ for $m_{H} = 125$ GeV, $m_s = 25$ GeV.

$CL_S$ limits on $B_{H\rightarrow ss}$ for $m_{H} = 125$ GeV, $m_s = 40$ GeV.

$CL_S$ limits on $B_{H\rightarrow ss}$ for $m_{H} = 125$ GeV, $m_s = 55$ GeV.

$CL_S$ limits on $\sigma \times B_{\Phi\rightarrow ss}$ for $m_{\Phi} = 200$ GeV, $m_s = 8$ GeV.

$CL_S$ limits on $\sigma \times B_{\Phi\rightarrow ss}$ for $m_{\Phi} = 200$ GeV, $m_s = 25$ GeV.

$CL_S$ limits on $\sigma \times B_{\Phi\rightarrow ss}$ for $m_{\Phi} = 200$ GeV, $m_s = 50$ GeV.

$CL_S$ limits on $\sigma \times B_{\Phi\rightarrow ss}$ for $m_{\Phi} = 400$ GeV, $m_s = 50$ GeV.

$CL_S$ limits on $\sigma \times B_{\Phi\rightarrow ss}$ for $m_{\Phi} = 400$ GeV, $m_s = 100$ GeV.

$CL_S$ limits on $\sigma \times B_{\Phi\rightarrow ss}$ for $m_{\Phi} = 600$ GeV, $m_s = 50$ GeV.

$CL_S$ limits on $\sigma \times B_{\Phi\rightarrow ss}$ for $m_{\Phi} = 600$ GeV, $m_s = 150$ GeV.

$CL_S$ limits on $\sigma \times B_{\Phi\rightarrow ss}$ for $m_{\Phi} = 1000$ GeV, $m_s = 50$ GeV.

$CL_S$ limits on $\sigma \times B_{\Phi\rightarrow ss}$ for $m_{\Phi} = 1000$ GeV, $m_s = 150$ GeV.

$CL_S$ limits on $\sigma \times B_{\Phi\rightarrow ss}$ for $m_{\Phi} = 1000$ GeV, $m_s = 400$ GeV.

Normalised production yields of $W^+$ and $W^-$ bosons as a function of $⟨N_{\mathrm{part}}⟩$ shown for the combination of electron and muon decay channels.

Normalised production yields for $W^+$ bosons as a function of $⟨N_{\mathrm{part}}⟩$ for geometric parameters obtained with the MCGlauber v2.4 and v3.2.

Normalised production yields for $W^-$ bosons as a function of $⟨N_{\mathrm{part}}⟩$ for geometric parameters obtained with the MCGlauber v2.4 and v3.2.

Nuclear modification factor $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ obtained from the fiducial $W^+$ and $W^-$ boson production yields as a function of $⟨N_{\mathrm{part}}⟩$.

The covariance matrix of the differential normalised production yields for $W^+$ bosons. Systematic uncertainties related to $T_{\mathrm{AA}}$ (1.6%) are not included.

The covariance matrix of the differential normalised production yields for $W^-$ bosons. Systematic uncertainties related to $T_{\mathrm{AA}}$ (1.6%) are not included.

The covariance matrix of the lepton charge asymmetry.

Distribution of the dimuon invariant mass for events passing the full selection.

Distribution of the dimuon invariant mass for events passing the full selection.

Distribution of the dimuon invariant mass for events passing the full selection.

Expected upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the combined dilepton channel.

Expected upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the combined dilepton channel.

Expected upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the combined dilepton channel.

Observed upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the combined dilepton channel.

Observed upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the combined dilepton channel.

Observed upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the combined dilepton channel.

Expected upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the dielectron channel.

Expected upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the dielectron channel.

Expected upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the dielectron channel.

Observed upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the dielectron channel.

Observed upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the dielectron channel.

Observed upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the dielectron channel.

Expected upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the dimuon channel.

Expected upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the dimuon channel.

Expected upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the dimuon channel.

Observed upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the dimuon channel.

Observed upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the dimuon channel.

Observed upper limits at 95% CL on the fiducial cross-section times branching ratio as a function of pole mass for the zero-width, 0.5%, 1.2%, 3%, 6% and 10% relative width signals for the dimuon channel.

Ratio of the observed limit to the Z'$_\mathrm{SSM}$ cross-section for the combination of the dielectron and dimuon channels. A number of previous ATLAS results at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7, 8, and 13 TeV are compared to the current search.

Ratio of the observed limit to the Z'$_\mathrm{SSM}$ cross-section for the combination of the dielectron and dimuon channels. A number of previous ATLAS results at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7, 8, and 13 TeV are compared to the current search.

Ratio of the observed limit to the Z'$_\mathrm{SSM}$ cross-section for the combination of the dielectron and dimuon channels. A number of previous ATLAS results at $\sqrt{s}$ = 7, 8, and 13 TeV are compared to the current search.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 3 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 3 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 3 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 4 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 4 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 4 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 5 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 5 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 5 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance mass of 3 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance mass of 3 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance mass of 3 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance mass of 4 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance mass of 4 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance mass of 4 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance mass of 5 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance mass of 5 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Observed 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance mass of 5 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 3 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 3 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 3 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 4 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 4 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 4 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 5 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 5 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_h,g_f\}$ with $g_f\equiv g_l=g_q$ for a resonance mass of 5 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance masses of 3 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance masses of 3 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance masses of 3 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance masses of 4 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance masses of 4 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance masses of 4 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance masses of 5 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance masses of 5 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Expected 95% exclusion contours in the HVT parameter space $\{g_q,g_l\}$ with $g_h$ set to zero for a resonance masses of 5 TeV for the dilepton channel. The area outside the curves is excluded.

Dielectron and dimuon selection efficiency as a function of pole mass for spin-0, spin-1 and spin-2 resonances. Drell-Yan MC samples are used for the spin-1 efficiencies and correspond to the zero-width signal hypothesis. Spin-0 (spin-2) efficiencies are obtained from dedicated MC samples with relative widths in the range of 0-20% (1-13%) and are averaged over all available width assumptions.

Dielectron and dimuon selection efficiency as a function of pole mass for spin-0, spin-1 and spin-2 resonances. Drell-Yan MC samples are used for the spin-1 efficiencies and correspond to the zero-width signal hypothesis. Spin-0 (spin-2) efficiencies are obtained from dedicated MC samples with relative widths in the range of 0-20% (1-13%) and are averaged over all available width assumptions.

Dielectron and dimuon selection efficiency as a function of pole mass for spin-0, spin-1 and spin-2 resonances. Drell-Yan MC samples are used for the spin-1 efficiencies and correspond to the zero-width signal hypothesis. Spin-0 (spin-2) efficiencies are obtained from dedicated MC samples with relative widths in the range of 0-20% (1-13%) and are averaged over all available width assumptions.

Description of the $m_{\ell\ell}^{\mathrm{true}}$-dependence for the seven relative mass resolution parameters in the dielectron channel.

Description of the $m_{\ell\ell}^{\mathrm{true}}$-dependence for the seven relative mass resolution parameters in the dielectron channel.

Description of the $m_{\ell\ell}^{\mathrm{true}}$-dependence for the seven relative mass resolution parameters in the dielectron channel.

Description of the $m_{\ell\ell}^{\mathrm{true}}$-dependence for the seven relative mass resolution parameters in the dimuon channel.

Description of the $m_{\ell\ell}^{\mathrm{true}}$-dependence for the seven relative mass resolution parameters in the dimuon channel.

Description of the $m_{\ell\ell}^{\mathrm{true}}$-dependence for the seven relative mass resolution parameters in the dimuon channel.

Data from Fig 3b. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$.

Data from Fig 3c. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. The uncertainties are applied symmetrically, though the cross section cannot go below zero in the first bin.

Data from Fig 3c. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, $\sigma$(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. The uncertainties are applied symmetrically, though the cross section cannot go below zero in the first bin.

Data from Fig 4 and Fig 8a-16a. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for beta = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, sigma(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 4 and FigAux 8a-16a. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for beta = 0, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, sigma(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 4 and Fig 8b-16b. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, sigma(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 4 and FigAux 8b-16b. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 1, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, sigma(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 8c-16c. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, sigma(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 8c-16c. The unfolded $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ distribution for anti-kt R=0.8 jets with $p_T$(lead) > 600 GeV, after the soft drop algorithm is applied for $\beta$ = 2, in data. All uncertainties described in the text are shown on the data; the uncertainties from the calculations are shown on each one. The distributions are normalized to the integrated cross section, sigma(resum), measured in the resummation region, $-3.7 < log_{10}(\rho^2) < -1.7$. Each set of 10 bins corresponds to one $p_T$ bin in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ } and 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 6a. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the combined $p_T$ and $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 0. Each group of 10 bins corresponds to a bin of $p_T$ in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ }; each bin within the $p_T$ bin corresponds to 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 6a. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the combined $p_T$ and $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 0. Each group of 10 bins corresponds to a bin of $p_T$ in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ }; each bin within the $p_T$ bin corresponds to 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 6b. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the combined $p_T$ and $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 1. Each group of 10 bins corresponds to a bin of $p_T$ in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ }; each bin within the $p_T$ bin corresponds to 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 6b. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the combined $p_T$ and $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 1. Each group of 10 bins corresponds to a bin of $p_T$ in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ }; each bin within the $p_T$ bin corresponds to 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 6c. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the combined $p_T$ and $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 2. Each group of 10 bins corresponds to a bin of $p_T$ in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ }; each bin within the $p_T$ bin corresponds to 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from FigAux 6c. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the combined $p_T$ and $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 2. Each group of 10 bins corresponds to a bin of $p_T$ in {600, 650, 700, 750, 800, 850, 900, 950, 1000, ∞ }; each bin within the $p_T$ bin corresponds to 10 evenly spaced bins in $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ from -4.5 to -0.5.

Data from Fig 7a. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 0, inclusive in $p_T$.

Data from FigAux 7a. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 0, inclusive in $p_T$.

Data from Fig 7b. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 1, inclusive in $p_T$.

Data from FigAux 7b. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 1, inclusive in $p_T$.

Data from Fig 7c. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 2, inclusive in $p_T$.

Data from FigAux 7c. The summed covariance matrices of the systematic and statistical uncertainties for the $log_{10}(\rho^2)$ bins for $\beta$ = 2, inclusive in $p_T$.