Expected and observed $am_{T2}$ distribution for bCd_high1 SR, before applying the $am_{T2}>200$ GeV requirement. The uncertainty includes statistical and all experimental systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflows.

Expected and observed leading b-jet $p_T$ distribution for bCd_high2 SR, before applying the leading b-jet $p_T>170$ GeV requirement. The uncertainty includes statistical and all experimental systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflows.

Expected and observed $E_T^{miss}$ distribution for tNbC_mix SR, before applying the $E_T^{miss}>270$ GeV requirement. The uncertainty includes statistical and all experimental systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflows.

Expected and observed lepton $p_T$ distribution for bCa_low SR. The uncertainty includes statistical and all experimental systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflows.

Expected and observed lepton $p_T$ distribution for bCa_med SR. The uncertainty includes statistical and all experimental systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflows.

Expected and observed $am_T2$ distribution for bCb_med1 SR. The uncertainty includes statistical and all experimental systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflows.

Expected and observed $am_T2$ distribution for bCb_high SR. The uncertainty includes statistical and all experimental systematic uncertainties. The last bin includes overflows.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$. This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1$ three-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to bW\chi^0_1$). This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1$ four-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to bff'\chi^0_1$). This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=150$ GeV. This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=106$ GeV. This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+5$ GeV. This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\tilde t_1}-10$ GeV. This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Best expected signal region for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}=300$ GeV. This mapping is used for the final combined exclusion limits.

Upper limits on the model cross-section for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1$ three-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to bW\chi^0_1$).

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1$ three-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to bW\chi^0_1$).

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1$ three-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to bW\chi^0_1$).

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1$ four-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to bff'\chi^0_1$).

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1$ four-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to bff'\chi^0_1$).

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1$ four-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to bff'\chi^0_1$).

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=150$ GeV.

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=150$ GeV.

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=150$ GeV.

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=106$ GeV.

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=106$ GeV.

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=106$ GeV.

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+5$ GeV.

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+5$ GeV.

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+5$ GeV.

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\tilde t_1}-10$ GeV.

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\tilde t_1}-10$ GeV.

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\tilde t_1}-10$ GeV.

Upper limit on signal events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}=300$ GeV.

Observed exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}=300$ GeV.

Expected exclusion contour for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}=300$ GeV.

Acceptance of tN_diag SR ($E_T^{miss}>150$ GeV, $m_T>140$ GeV) for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of tN_med SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of tN_boost SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCb_med2 SR ($am_{T2}>250$ GeV, $m_T>60$ GeV) for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCc_diag SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCd_bulk SR ($am_{T2}>175$ GeV, $m_T>120$ GeV) for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCd_high1 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCd_high2 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCa_med for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCa_low for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCb_med1 for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of bCb_high for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of 3-body SR ($80<am_{T2}<90$ GeV, $m_T>120$ GeV) for the 3-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to b W\chi^0_1$). The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Acceptance of tNbC_mix SR for the asymmetric scenario ($\tilde t_1$, $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$, b $\chi^\pm_1$) with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The acceptance is defined as the fraction of signal events that pass the analysis selection performed on generator-level objects, therefore emulating an ideal detector with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects.

Efficiency of tN_diag SR ($E_T^{miss}>150$ GeV, $m_T>140$ GeV) for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of tN_med SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of tN_boost SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCb_med2 SR ($am_{T2}>250$ GeV, $m_T>60$ GeV) for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCc_diag SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCd_bulk SR ($am_{T2}>175$ GeV, $m_T>120$ GeV) for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCd_high1 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCd_high2 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCa_med for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCa_low for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCb_med1 for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of bCb_high for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of 3-body SR ($80<am_{T2}<90$ GeV, $m_T>120$ GeV) for the 3-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to b W\chi^0_1$). The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Efficiency of tNbC_mix SR for the asymmetric scenario ($\tilde t_1$, $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$, b $\chi^\pm_1$) with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$. The efficiency is the ratio between the expected signal rate calculated with simulated data passing all the reconstruction level cuts applied to reconstructed objects, and the signal rate for an ideal detector (with perfect particle identification and no measurement resolution effects).

Number of generated events for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Number of generated events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Number of generated events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV; $E_T^{miss}$(gen)$>60$ GeV.

Number of generated events for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV; $E_T^{miss}$(gen)$>250$ GeV.

Number of generated events for the 3-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to b W\chi^0_1$).

Number of generated events for the asymmetric scenario ($\tilde t_1$, $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$, b $\chi^\pm_1$) with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Cross-section for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Cross-section for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Cross-section for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Cross-section for the 3-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to b W\chi^0_1$).

Cross-section for the asymmetric scenario ($\tilde t_1$, $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$, b $\chi^\pm_1$) with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected tN_diag SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$, using the 2 highest $E_T^{miss}$ and 2 highest $m_T$ bins.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected tN_med SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected tN_boost SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCb_med2 SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$, using the 2 highest $am_{T2}$ and 2 highest $m_T$ bins.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCc_diag SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCd_bulk SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$, using the 2 highest $am_{T2}$ and 2 highest $m_T$ bins.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCd_high1 SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCd_high2 SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCa_med SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCa_low SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCb_med1 SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected bCb_high SR yields for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected 3-body SR yields for the 3-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to b W\chi^0_1$), using the 2 lowest $am_{T2}$ and 2 highest $m_T$ bins.

Combined experimental systematic uncertainty of expected tNbC_mix SR yields for the asymmetric scenario ($\tilde t_1$, $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$, b $\chi^\pm_1$) with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in tN_diag SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in tN_med SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in tN_boost SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in bCb_med2 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in bCc_diag SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in bCd_bulk SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in bCd_high1 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in bCd_high2 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Observed CLs in bCa_med SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Observed CLs in bCa_low SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Observed CLs in bCb_med1 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Observed CLs in bCb_high SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Observed CLs in 3-body SR for the 3-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to b W\chi^0_1$).

Observed CLs in tNbC_mix SR for the mixed scenario (50% $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$, 50% $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^0_1$).

Expected CLs in tN_diag SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected CLs in tN_med SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected CLs in tN_boost SR for the $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$ scenario with $m_{\tilde t_1}>m_t+m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected CLs in bCb_med2 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected CLs in bCc_diag SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected CLs in bCd_bulk SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected CLs in bCd_high1 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected CLs in bCd_high2 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=2\times m_{\chi^0_1}$.

Expected CLs in bCa_med SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Expected CLs in bCa_low SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Expected CLs in bCb_med1 SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Expected CLs in bCb_high SR for the $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$ scenario with $m_{\chi^\pm_1}=m_{\chi^0_1}+20$ GeV.

Expected CLs in 3-body SR for the 3-body scenario ($\tilde t_1\to b W\chi^0_1$).

Expected CLs in tNbC_mix SR for the mixed scenario (50% $\tilde t_1\to t\chi^0_1$, 50% $\tilde t_1\to b\chi^\pm_1$).

Mean number of jets in rapidity interval as a function of leading dijet scalar mean pT in GeV.

First azimuthal angular moment as a function of leading dijet rapidity separation.

First azimuthal angular moment as a function of leading dijet scalar mean pT in GeV.

Ratio of second azimuthal angular moment to first as a function of leading dijet rapidity separation.

Ratio of second azimuthal angular moment to first as a function of leading dijet scalar mean pT in GeV.

First azimuthal angular moment as a function of leading dijet rapidity separation.

First azimuthal angular moment as a function of leading dijet scalar mean pT in GeV.

Ratio of second azimuthal angular moment to first as a function of leading dijet rapidity separation.

Ratio of second azimuthal angular moment to first as a function of leading dijet scalar mean pT in GeV.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 0 < dijet rapidity separation <= 1.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 1 < dijet rapidity separation <= 2.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 2 < dijet rapidity separation <= 3.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 3 < dijet rapidity separation <= 4.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 4 < dijet rapidity separation <= 5.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 5 < dijet rapidity separation <= 6.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 6 < dijet rapidity separation <= 7.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 7 < dijet rapidity separation <= 8.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 0 < dijet rapidity separation <= 1.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 1 < dijet rapidity separation <= 2.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 2 < dijet rapidity separation <= 3.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 3 < dijet rapidity separation <= 4.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 4 < dijet rapidity separation <= 5.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 5 < dijet rapidity separation <= 6.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 6 < dijet rapidity separation <= 7.

Differential cross section as a function of dijet azimuthal separation for events satisfying 7 < dijet rapidity separation <= 8.

Gap fraction as a function of veto scale in GeV for events satisfying 0 < dijet rapidity separation <= 1.

Gap fraction as a function of veto scale in GeV for events satisfying 1 < dijet rapidity separation <= 2.

Gap fraction as a function of veto scale in GeV for events satisfying 2 < dijet rapidity separation <= 3.

Gap fraction as a function of veto scale in GeV for events satisfying 3 < dijet rapidity separation <= 4.

Gap fraction as a function of veto scale in GeV for events satisfying 4 < dijet rapidity separation <= 5.

Gap fraction as a function of veto scale in GeV for events satisfying 5 < dijet rapidity separation <= 6.

Gap fraction as a function of veto scale in GeV for events satisfying 6 < dijet rapidity separation <= 7.

Gap fraction as a function of veto scale in GeV for events satisfying 7 < dijet rapidity separation <= 8.

Second azimuthal angular moment as a function of leading dijet rapidity separation.

Second azimuthal angular moment as a function of leading dijet scalar mean pT in GeV.

Second azimuthal angular moment as a function of leading dijet rapidity separation.

Second azimuthal angular moment as a function of leading dijet scalar mean pT in GeV.

The measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution in the $W \rightarrow \mu \nu$ control region, for the M1 selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution in the $W \rightarrow e \nu$ control region, for the M1 selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution in the $W \rightarrow e \nu$ control region, for the M1 selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution in the $Z \rightarrow \mu \mu$ control region, for the M1 selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution in the $Z \rightarrow \mu \mu$ control region, for the M1 selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution in the $W\rightarrow \mu \nu$ control region, for the c-tagged selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution in the $W\rightarrow \mu \nu$ control region, for the c-tagged selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution in the $W\rightarrow e \nu$ control region, for the c-tagged selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution in the $W\rightarrow e \nu$ control region, for the c-tagged selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution in the $Z\rightarrow ll$ control region, for the c-tagged selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution in the $Z\rightarrow ll$ control region, for the c-tagged selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution in the t-(anti)-t control region, for the c-tagged selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution in the t-(anti)-t control region, for the c-tagged selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

Measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution for the V3 selections compared to the SM predictions.

Measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution for the V4 selections compared to the SM predictions.

Measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution for the V5 selections compared to the SM predictions.

Measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution for the V5 selections compared to the SM predictions.

Measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution for the M1 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution for the M1 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution for the M2 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution for the M2 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution for the M3 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution for the M3 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution for the C1 selection before the cut in the variable shown is applied. The data are compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured leading jet $p_T$ distribution for the C1 selection before the cut in the variable shown is applied. The data are compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured leading jet $p_T$ for the C2 selection. The data are compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured jet multiplicity for the C2 selection. The data are compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the distribution of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

The measured $W$ transverse mass distribution in the $W \rightarrow \mu \nu$ control region for the M1 monojet-like selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured $W$ transverse mass distribution in the $W \rightarrow e \nu$ control region for the M1 monojet-like selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured dimuon invariant mass distribution in the $Z \rightarrow \mu \mu$ control region for the M1 monojet-like selection, compared to the background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

The measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution in a multijet control sample for the monojet-like analysis. This region is defined with similar $E_T^{miss}$ and leading jet $p_T$ cuts as M1, but releasing the jet-veto and inverting the $\Delta \phi (jet, p_T^{miss})$ cut, now requiring it to be less than 0.4. The data are compared to predictions.

Measured jet multiplicity in the $W \rightarrow e \nu$ control region for the c-tagged analysis, compared to background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

Measured jet multiplicity in the $W \rightarrow \mu \nu$ control region for the c-tagged analysis, compared to background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

Measured jet multiplicity in the $Z \rightarrow ll$ control region for the c-tagged analysis, compared to background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

Measured jet multiplicity in the t-(anti)-t control region for the c-tagged analysis, compared to background predictions. The latter include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

Measured dilepton invariant mass in the $Z \rightarrow ll$ control region for the c-tagged analysis. The predictions include the global normalization factors extracted from the fit.

Measured jet multiplicity distribution for the M1 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the impact of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured leading jet $\eta$ distribution for the M1 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the impact of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured $\Delta \phi (jet, p_T^{miss})$ distribution for the M1 selection compared to the SM predictions. For illustration purposes, the impact of two different SUSY scenarios are included.

Measured $E_T^{miss}$ distribution after preselection cuts compared to background predictions.

Measured jet multiplicity distribution in the C1 c-tagged selection compared to background predictions.

Multiplicity of jets with loose heavy-flavor tags in the C1 selection.

Multiplicity of jets with medium heavy-flavor tags in the C1 selection.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M1 SR for $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow c + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M2 SR for $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow c + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M3 SR for $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow c + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for C1 SR for $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow c + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for C2 SR for $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow c + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M1 SR for $\tilde{b}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M2 SR for $\tilde{b}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M3 SR for $\tilde{b}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M1 SR for $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + ff' + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M2 SR for $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + ff' + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

Expected and observed CLs, number of events, acceptance and efficiency for M3 SR for $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + ff' + \tilde{\chi}^0_1$. The expected event yield in 20.3 fb$^{-1}$, $N_{\text{events}}$, is used to calculate $\sigma\times A\times\varepsilon$ and $A\times\varepsilon$. The acceptance $A$ is defined as the percentage of events passing the selection at truth level, and the efficiency $\varepsilon$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level. The modified efficiency $\varepsilon\prime$ is the ratio of events passing the selection at truth and reconstructed level over the number of events passing the selection at truth level.

.

.

.

.

.

.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

95% CL upper limits on the cross section [fb].

Number of signal events.

Acceptance [%].

Efficiency [%].

Experimental uncertainty.

Expected CLs.

Observed CLs.

Best signal region.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

95% CL upper limits on the cross section [fb].

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour.

95% CL upper limits on the cross section [fb].

Number of signal events.

Acceptance [%].

Efficiency [%].

Uncertainty [%].

Expected CLs.

Observed CLs.

Best signal region.

Best signal region.

D(z) distribution for R=0.4 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.4 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.4 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.4 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.4 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.4 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.3 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.3 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.3 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.3 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.3 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.3 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.3 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.2 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.2 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.2 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.2 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.2 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.2 jets.

D(z) distribution for R=0.2 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.4 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.4 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.4 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.4 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.4 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.4 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.4 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.3 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.3 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.3 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.3 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.3 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.3 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.3 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.2 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.2 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.2 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.2 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.2 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.2 jets.

D(pt) distribution for R=0.2 jets.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.

Ratio of D(pt) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.

The measured individual cross sections in the fiducial region and the combined cross sections for 4-muon and 4-electron final states at a centre-of-collision energy of 8 TeV.

The measured individual cross sections in the fiducial region and the combined cross sections for for 2-muon-2-electron final states at a centre-of-collision energy of 8 TeV.

The measured cross section for four-lepton final states at a centre-of-collision energy of 8 TeV.

The branching fraction for Z0 --> 4 LEPTON, summed over all final states, measured using both the 7 and 8 TeV datasets.

Effective mass distribution in the multi-jet CR DS-lowMass.

Distribution of Met in the W+jets control region with 20.3/fb.

Distribution of Meff in the W+jets control region with 20.3/fb.

Distribution of Mt2 in the W+jets control region with 20.3/fb.

Distribution of Mt(tau1)+Mt(tau2) in the W+jets control region with 20.3/fb.

Distribution of Meff in the W+jets control region with 20.3/fb.

Distribution of Meff in the Z+jets control region with 20.3/fb.

The stransverse mass distribution in the WW-C1N2 validation region.

Mt(tau1)+Mt(tau2) distribution in Top-VR.

The stransverse mass distribution in SR-C1N2.

Mt(tau1)+Mt(tau2) distribution in SR-C1C1.

Effective mass distribution in SRDS-highMass.

Effective mass distribution in SRDS-lowMass.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for simplified models with a combination of chargino-neutralino and chargino-chargino production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for simplified models with a combination of chargino-neutralino and chargino-chargino production.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for simplified models with chargino-chargino production.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for simplified models with chargino-chargino production.

Upper limits on the cross section for production of only right-handed stau pairs.

Upper limits on the cross section for production of only left-handed stau pairs.

Upper limits on the signal strength for the associated production of right-handed and left-handed stau pairs.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for the pMSSM models with fixed stau mass, M1=50 GeV.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for the pMSSM models with fixed stau mass, M1=50 GeV.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for the pMSSM models with variable stau mass, M1=75 GeV.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for the pMSSM models with variable stau mass, M1=75 GeV.

Numbers give 95% CL excluded model cross sections for the simplified models with chargino-chargino production.

Numbers give 95% CL excluded model cross sections for the simplified models with chargino-neutralino production.

SR with best expected p0-value for each point for the simplified models with chargino-neutralino and chargino-chargino production. SR-C1N2 (SR-C1C1) is indicated with 1 (2) and SR-DS-highMass (SR-DS-lowMass) is indicated with 3 (4).

SR with best expected p0-value for each point for the simplified models with chargino-chargino production. SR-C1N2 (SR-C1C1) is indicated with 1 (2) and SR-DS-highMass (SR-DS-lowMass) is indicated with 3 (4).

SR with best expected p0-value for each point for direct stau pair production. SR-C1N2 (SR-C1C1) is indicated with 1 (2) and SR-DS-highMass (SR-DS-lowMass) is indicated with 3 (4).

SR with best expected p0-value for each point for direct stau pair production (left-handed). SR-C1N2 (SR-C1C1) is indicated with 1 (2) and SR-DS-highMass (SR-DS-lowMass) is indicated with 3 (4).

SR with best expected p0-value for each point for direct stau pair production (right-handed). SR-C1N2 (SR-C1C1) is indicated with 1 (2) and SR-DS-highMass (SR-DS-lowMass) is indicated with 3 (4).

SR with best expected p0-value for each point for the pMSSM models with fixed stau mass, M1=50 GeV. SR-C1N2 (SR-C1C1) is indicated with 1 (2) and SR-DS-highMass (SR-DS-lowMass) is indicated with 3 (4).

SR with best expected p0-value for each point for the pMSSM models with variable stau mass, M1=75 GeV. SR-C1N2 (SR-C1C1) is indicated with 1 (2) and SR-DS-highMass (SR-DS-lowMass) is indicated with 3 (4).

Cutflows for the three SUSY reference points. The event yields have been normalised to 20.3/fb.

Cutflows for data and the SM backgrounds estimated from MC.

Detailed information for the three SUSY benchmark grid points (from left to right): the reference point(1: (chargino1(neutralino2),neutralino1)=(250,100)GeV, 2: (chargino1,neutralino1)=(250,50) GeV, 3: (stauR (stauL), neutralino1)=(127(129),0) GeV), production process(1:chargino1-neutralino2, 2:chargino1-chargino1, 3:stauL-stauL, 4:stauR-stauR), cross section, number of generated MC events, considered signal region(1:C1N2, 2:C1C1, 3:DS-highMass,4:DS-lowMass), event yield after normalization to 20.3 fb-1, acceptance (Acc.), efficiency (Eff.) on the signal selection, absolute systematic uncertainty on signal yields, 95% CL observed and expected limits on the number of events.

Number of generated events for the simplified models with chargino-neutralino production.

Number of generated events for the simplified models with chargino-chargino production.

Number of generated events for direct left-handed stau pair production.

Number of generated events for direct right-handed stau pair production.

Production cross section for the simplified models with chargino-neutralino production.

Production cross section for the simplified models with chargino-chargino production.

Production cross section for direct left-handed stau pair production.

Production cross section for direct right-handed stau pair production.

Acceptance for the simplified models with chargino-neutralino production.

Acceptance for the simplified models with chargino-chargino production.

Acceptance for direct left-handed stau pair production.

Acceptance for direct right-handed stau pair production.

Efficiency for the simplified models with chargino-neutralino production.

Efficiency for the simplified models with chargino-chargino production.

Efficiency for direct stau (the left-handed) pair production.

Efficiency for direct stau (the right-handed) pair production.

Experimental systematics (in percentage) for the simplified models with chargino-neutralino production.

Experimental systematics (in percentage) for the simplified models with chargino-chargino production.

Experimental systematics (in percentage) for direct stau (the left-handed) pair production.

Experimental systematics (in percentage) for direct stau (the right-handed) pair production.

Observed CLs for the simplified models with chargino-neutralino production.

Observed CLs for the simplified models with chargino-chargino production.

Observed CLs for direct stau (the left-handed) pair production.

Observed CLs for direct stau (the right-handed) pair production.

Expected CLs for the simplified models with chargino-neutralino production.

Expected CLs for the simplified models with chargino-chargino production.

Expected CLs for direct stau (the left-handed) pair production.

Expected CLs for direct stau (the right-handed) pair production.

The effective mass distribution in 3-jet signal region.

The effective mass distribution in 4-jet (W) signal region.

The effective mass distribution in 4-jet very-loose and loose signal regions.

The effective mass distribution in 4-jet medium signal region.

The effective mass distribution in 4-jet tight signal region.

The effective mass distribution in 5-jet signal region.

The effective mass distribution in 6-jet loose and medium signal regions.

The effective mass distribution in 6-jet tight signal region.

The effective mass distribution in 6-jet very-tight signal region.

Observed limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL.

Observed limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL.

Observed limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL (m_chi^0_1=0GeV).

Expected limit 95% CL (m_chi^0_1=0GeV).

Observed limit 95% CL +1 sigma (m_chi^0_1=0GeV).

Observed limit 95% CL -1 sigma (m_chi^0_1=0GeV).

Expected limit 95% CL +1 sigma (m_chi^0_1=0GeV).

Expected limit 95% CL -1 sigma (m_chi^0_1=0GeV).

Observed limit 95% CL (m_chi^0_1=395GeV).

Expected limit 95% CL (m_chi^0_1=395GeV).

Observed limit 95% CL (m_chi^0_1=695GeV).

Expected limit 95% CL (m_chi^0_1=695GeV).

Expected limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL.

Observed CLs contour for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour with plus 1-sigma signal cross-section uncertainty for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour with minus 1-sigma signal cross-section uncertainty for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour with plus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour with minus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour with plus 1-sigma signal cross-section uncertainty for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour with minus 1-sigma signal cross-section uncertainty for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour with plus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour with minus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour with plus 1-sigma signal cross-section uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour with minus 1-sigma signal cross-section uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour with plus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

First of two expected CLs contours with minus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Second of two expected CLs contours with minus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour with plus 1-sigma signal cross-section uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed CLs contour with minus 1-sigma signal cross-section uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour with plus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected CLs contour with minus 1-sigma experimental uncertainty for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to a quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Expected limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL.

Expected limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Expected limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL -1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL +1 sigma.

Observed limit 95% CL.

Signal region for points.

Signal region for points.

Signal region for points (m_chi^0_1=0GeV).

Signal region for points (m_chi^0_1=395GeV).

Signal region for points (m_chi^0_1=695GeV).

Observed 95% CL cross-section upper limit for pair-produced gluinos decaying directly.

Observed 95% CL cross-section upper limit for associated gluino-squark production.

Observed 95% CL cross-section upper limit for pair-produced squarks decaying directly.

Observed 95% CL cross-section upper limit for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed 95% CL cross-section upper limit for the pair-produced gluinos each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to two quarks, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed 95% CL cross-section upper limit for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Observed 95% CL cross-section upper limit for the pair-produced squarks each decaying via an intermediate chargino1 to quark, a W boson and a neutralino1.

Signal region for points.

Observed 95% CL cross-section upper limit for pair-produced gluinos decaying via stops into top+charm+neutralino1.

Production cross-section in PB.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR2jl.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR2jl.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR2jl.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR2jm.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR2jm.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR2jm.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR2jt.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR2jt.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR2jt.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR2jW.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR2jW.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR2jW.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR3j.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR3j.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR3j.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jW.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jW.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jW.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jl-.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jl-.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jl-.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jl.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jl.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jl.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jm.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jm.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jm.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jt.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jt.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jt.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR5j.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR5j.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR5j.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR6jl.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR6jl.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR6jl.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR6jm.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR6jm.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR6jm.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR6jt.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR6jt.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR6jt.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR6jt+.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR6jt+.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR6jt+.

Production cross-section in PB.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR2jl.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR2jl.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR2jl.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR2jm.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR2jm.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR2jm.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR2jt.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR2jt.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR2jt.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR2jW.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR2jW.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR2jW.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR3j.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR3j.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR3j.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jW.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jW.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jW.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jl-.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jl-.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jl-.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jl.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jl.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jl.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jm.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jm.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jm.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR4jt.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR4jt.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR4jt.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR5j.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR5j.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR5j.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR6jl.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR6jl.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR6jl.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR6jm.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR6jm.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR6jm.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR6jt.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR6jt.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR6jt.

Signal acceptance in PCT for SR6jt+.

Signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency in PCT for SR6jt+.

Uncertainty on signal acceptance times reconstruction efficiency for SR6jt+.

Distribution of the transverse mass of the $W$-candidate $m_{\rm T}^{W}$ for the one lepton and two $b$-jets channel in SRlbb-1 and SRlbb-2, $m_{bb}$ sidebands. The background histograms are obtained from the background-only fit, and their uncertainty represents the total background uncertainty after the fit. The last bin includes overflow.

Distribution of the number of $b$-jets for the one lepton and two $b$-jets channel in SRlbb-1 and SRlbb-2 without the b-jet multiplicity requirement, central $m_{bb}$ bin. The background histograms are obtained from the background-only fit, and their uncertainty represents the total background uncertainty after the fit.

Distribution of the invariant mass of the $b$-jets $m_{bb}$ for the one lepton and two $b$-jets channel in the SRlbb-1 and SRlbb-2. The background histograms are obtained from the background-only fit, and their uncertainty represents the total background uncertainty after the fit.

Distribution of missing transverse momentum $E_{\rm T}^{\rm miss}$ in the one lepton and two photons signal regions SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-1 and SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-2 for the Higgs-mass window ($120\lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 130$ GeV). The final column (background) is a simulation-based cross check. The contributions from non-Higgs backgrounds are scaled by 10 GeV / 50 GeV = 0.2 from the $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ sideband ($100 \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 120$ GeV and $130 \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 160$ GeV) into the Higgs-mass window. The last bin includes overflow. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(165,35)$ GeV.

Distribution of the azimuth difference between the $W$ and Higgs boson candidates $\Delta\phi(W,h)$ in the one lepton and two photons signal regions SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-1 and SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-2 for the Higgs-mass window ($120\lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 130$ GeV). The final column (background) is a simulation-based cross check. The contributions from non-Higgs backgrounds are scaled by 10 GeV / 50 GeV = 0.2 from the $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ sideband ($100 \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 120$ GeV and $130 \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 160$ GeV) into the Higgs-mass window. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(165,35)$ GeV.

Distribution of the transverse mass of the $W$ and photon system $m_{\rm{T}}^{W\gamma_1}$ in the one lepton and two photons signal regions SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-1 and SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-2 for the Higgs-mass window ($120\lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 130$ GeV). The final column (background) is a simulation-based cross check. The contributions from non-Higgs backgrounds are scaled by 10 GeV / 50 GeV = 0.2 from the $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ sideband ($100 \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 120$ GeV and $130 \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 160$ GeV) into the Higgs-mass window. The last bin includes overflow. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(165,35)$ GeV.

Distribution of the transverse mass of the $W$ and photon system $m_{\rm{T}}^{W\gamma_2}$ in the one lepton and two photons signal regions SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-1 and SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-2 for the Higgs-mass window ($120\lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 130$ GeV). The final column (background) is a simulation-based cross check. The contributions from non-Higgs backgrounds are scaled by 10 GeV / 50 GeV = 0.2 from the $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ sideband ($100 \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 120$ GeV and $130 \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt 160$ GeV) into the Higgs-mass window. The last bin includes overflow. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(165,35)$ GeV.

Results of the background-only fit to the diphoton invariant mass, $m_{\gamma\gamma}$, distribution in the one lepton and two photons signal region SR$l\gamma\gamma$-1. The contributions from SM Higgs boson production are constrained to the MC prediction and associated systematic uncertainties. The fit is performed on events with 100 GeV $ \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt $ 160 GeV, with events in SR$l\gamma\gamma$-1 or SR$l\gamma\gamma$-2 in the Higgs-mass window (120 GeV $\le m_{\gamma\gamma} \le$ 130 GeV) excluded from the fit.

Results of the background-only fit to the diphoton invariant mass, $m_{\gamma\gamma}$, distribution in the one lepton and two photons signal region SR$l\gamma\gamma$-2. The contributions from SM Higgs boson production are constrained to the MC prediction and associated systematic uncertainties. The fit is performed on events with 100 GeV $ \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt $ 160 GeV, with events in SR$l\gamma\gamma$-1 or SR$l\gamma\gamma$-2 in the Higgs-mass window (120 GeV $\le m_{\gamma\gamma} \le$ 130 GeV) excluded from the fit.

Results of the background-only fit to the diphoton invariant mass, $m_{\gamma\gamma}$, distribution in the one lepton and two photons validation region VR$l\gamma\gamma$-1. The contributions from SM Higgs boson production are constrained to the MC prediction and associated systematic uncertainties. The fit is performed on events with 100 GeV $ \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt $ 160 GeV, with events in SR$l\gamma\gamma$-1 or SR$l\gamma\gamma$-2 in the Higgs-mass window (120 GeV $\le m_{\gamma\gamma} \le$ 130 GeV) excluded from the fit.

Results of the background-only fit to the diphoton invariant mass, $m_{\gamma\gamma}$, distribution in the one lepton and two photons validation region VR$l\gamma\gamma$-2. The contributions from SM Higgs boson production are constrained to the MC prediction and associated systematic uncertainties. The fit is performed on events with 100 GeV $ \lt m_{\gamma\gamma} \lt $ 160 GeV, with events in SR$l\gamma\gamma$-1 or SR$l\gamma\gamma$-2 in the Higgs-mass window (120 GeV $\le m_{\gamma\gamma} \le$ 130 GeV) excluded from the fit.

Distribution of effective mass $m_{\rm eff}$ in the validation region of the same-sign $e\mu$ channel. This validation region is defined by requiring one, two, or three jets, and reversing the $m_{lj}$, $m_{ljj}$ criteria. The distribution of a signal hypothesis is also shown.

Distribution of effective mass $m_{\rm eff}$ for the same-sign dilepton channel in the signal regions with one jet SR$ll$-1. SR$ll$-1 is the sum of SR$ee$-1, SR$e\mu$-1, and SR$\mu\mu$-1. All selection criteria are applied, except for the one on $m_{\rm eff}$. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(130,0)$ GeV. The last bin includes overflow.

Distribution of effective mass $m_{\rm eff}$ for the same-sign dilepton channel in the signal regions with two or three jets SR$ll$-2. SR$ll$-2 is the sum of SR$ee$-2, SR$e\mu$-2, and SR$\mu\mu$-2. All selection criteria are applied, except for the one on $m_{\rm eff}$. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(130,0)$ GeV. The last bin includes overflow.

Distribution of largest transverse mass $m_{\rm T}^{\rm max}$ for the same-sign dilepton channel in the signal regions with one jet SR$ll$-1. SR$ll$-1 is the sum of SR$ee$-1, SR$e\mu$-1, and SR$\mu\mu$-1. All selection criteria are applied, except for the one on $m_{\rm T}^{\rm max}$. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(130,0)$ GeV. The last bin includes overflow.

Distribution of largest transverse mass $m_{\rm T}^{\rm max}$ for the same-sign dilepton channel in the signal regions with two or three jets SR$ll$-2. SR$ll$-2 is the sum of SR$ee$-2, SR$e\mu$-2, and SR$\mu\mu$-2. All selection criteria are applied, except for the one on $m_{\rm T}^{\rm max}$. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(130,0)$ GeV. The last bin includes overflow.

Distribution of invariant mass of lepton and jet $m_{lj}$ for the same-sign dilepton channel in the signal regions with one jet SR$ll$-1. SR$ll$-1 is the sum of SR$ee$-1, SR$e\mu$-1, and SR$\mu\mu$-1. All selection criteria are applied, except for the one on $m_{lj}$. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(130,0)$ GeV. The last bin includes overflow.

Distribution of invariant mass of lepton and di-jet $m_{ljj}$ for the same-sign dilepton channel in the signal regions with two or three jets SR$ll$-2. SR$ll$-2 is the sum of SR$ee$-2, SR$e\mu$-2, and SR$\mu\mu$-2. All selection criteria are applied, except for the one on $m_{ljj}$. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(130,0)$ GeV. The last bin includes overflow.

One lepton and two $b$-jets channel: observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the cross section normalised by the simplified model prediction as a function of the common mass $m_{\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}^0_2}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1}=0$.

One lepton and two photons channel: observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the cross section normalised by the simplified model prediction as a function of the common mass $m_{\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}^0_2}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1}=0$.

Same-sign dilepton channel: observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the cross section normalised by the simplified model prediction as a function of the common mass $m_{\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}^0_2}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1}=0$.

Combination: observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the cross section normalised by the simplified model prediction as a function of the common mass $m_{\tilde{\chi}_1^\pm \tilde{\chi}^0_2}$ for $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1}=0$. This combination is obtained using the result from the ATLAS three-lepton search, J. High Energy Phys. 04 (2014) 169, in addition to the three channels reported in this paper.

One lepton and two b-jets channel: Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for chargino neutralino production via Wh.

One lepton and two b-jets channel: Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for chargino neutralino production via Wh.

One lepton and two photons channel: Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for chargino neutralino production via Wh.

One lepton and two photons channel: Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for chargino neutralino production via Wh.

Same-sign dilepton channel: Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for chargino neutralino production via Wh.

Same-sign dilepton channel: Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for chargino neutralino production via Wh.

Combination: Expected 95% CL exclusion contour for chargino neutralino production via Wh.

Combination: Observed 95% CL exclusion contour for chargino neutralino production via Wh.

Combination: excluded model cross-section at 95% CL IN PB.

Acceptance SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-1.

Acceptance SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-2.

Efficiency SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-1.

Efficiency SR$\ell\gamma\gamma$-2.

$m_{\gamma\gamma}$ distribution in the SR$l\gamma\gamma$-1 region for the full $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ window. The last column (background) is from a simulation-based cross check. $Z\gamma$ events, with $Z\rightarrow{ee}$ and one electron mis-identified as a photon, are included in the $Z\gamma(\gamma)$ background. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(165,35)$ GeV.

$m_{\gamma\gamma}$ distribution in the SR$l\gamma\gamma$-2 region for the full $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ window. The last column (background) is from a simulation-based cross check. $Z\gamma$ events, with $Z\rightarrow{ee}$ and one electron mis-identified as a photon, are included in the $Z\gamma(\gamma)$ background. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(165,35)$ GeV.

$m_{\gamma\gamma}$ distribution in the VR$l\gamma\gamma$-1 region for the full $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ window. The last column (background) is from a simulation-based cross check. $Z\gamma$ events, with $Z\rightarrow{ee}$ and one electron mis-identified as a photon, are included in the $Z\gamma(\gamma)$ background. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(165,35)$ GeV.

$m_{\gamma\gamma}$ distribution in the VR$l\gamma\gamma$-2 region for the full $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ window. The last column (background) is from a simulation-based cross check. $Z\gamma$ events, with $Z\rightarrow{ee}$ and one electron mis-identified as a photon, are included in the $Z\gamma(\gamma)$ background. The distributions of a signal hypothesis are also shown for $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2},\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1})=(165,35)$ GeV.

Acceptance for SRlbb-1, central $m_{bb}$ bin.

Acceptance for SRlbb-1, $m_{bb}$ sideband.

Acceptance for SRlbb-2, central $m_{bb}$ bin.

Acceptance for SRlbb-2, $m_{bb}$ sideband.

Efficiency for SRlbb-1, central $m_{bb}$ bin.

Efficiency for SRlbb-1, $m_{bb}$ sideband.

Efficiency for SRlbb-2, central $m_{bb}$ bin.

Efficiency for SRlbb-2, $m_{bb}$ sideband.

Acceptance for the same-sign $ee$ channel with one jet.

Acceptance for the same-sign $ee$ channel with two or three jets.

Acceptance for the same-sign $e\mu$ channel with one jet.

Acceptance for the same-sign $e\mu$ channel with two or three jets.

Acceptance for the same-sign $\mu\mu$ channel with one jet.

Acceptance for the same-sign $\mu\mu$ channel with two or three jets.

Efficiency for the same-sign $ee$ channel with one jet.

Efficiency for the same-sign $ee$ channel with two or three jets.

Efficiency for the same-sign $e\mu$ channel with one jet.

Efficiency for the same-sign $e\mu$ channel with two or three jets.

Efficiency for the same-sign $\mu\mu$ channel with one jet.

Efficiency for the same-sign $\mu\mu$ channel with two or three jets.

Ratio of the Z'NU to Z'SSM acceptance times efficiency (ACC*EFF) in the lep-had channel as a function of sin^2phi and the Z' mass.

Z' SSM acceptance (ACC) and product of acceptance and efficiency (ACC*EFF) for the had-had and lep-had selections as a function of the Z' mass.

Number of expected Z'SSM signal (NS), background (NB) and observed (N) events passing the total transverse mass ($m_{\rm T}^{\rm tot}$) threshold in the had-had and lep-had channels.

Median expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on the cross-section times branching fraction to tau+tau- for Z'SSM production for the exclusive had-had and lep-had channels, and for both channels combined.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the cross-section times branching fraction to tau+tau- for Z'L and Z'R production for the combination of the had-had and lep-had channels.

Observed 95% CL lower limit on the Z'NU mass as a function of sin^2(phi).