Prompt and non-prompt production cross-section times branching ratio as a function of $\psi(2\mathrm{S})$ $p_{\rm T}$ for $\psi(2\mathrm{S})$ rapidity interval of $0\leq |y| < 0.75$. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic. Spin-alignment and luminosity ($\pm 1.8\%$) uncertainties are not included.

Prompt and non-prompt production cross-section times branching ratio as a function of $\psi(2\mathrm{S})$ $p_{\rm T}$ for $\psi(2\mathrm{S})$ rapidity interval of $0.75\leq |y| < 1.5$. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic. Spin-alignment and luminosity ($\pm 1.8\%$) uncertainties are not included.

Prompt and non-prompt production cross-section times branching ratio as a function of $\psi(2\mathrm{S})$ $p_{\rm T}$ for $\psi(2\mathrm{S})$ rapidity interval of $1.5\leq |y| < 2$. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic. Spin-alignment and luminosity ($\pm 1.8\%$) uncertainties are not included.

Prompt and non-prompt production cross-section times branching ratio as a function of $J/\psi$ $p_{\rm T}$ for $J/\psi$ rapidity interval of $0\leq |y| < 0.75$. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic. Spin-alignment and luminosity ($\pm 1.8\%$) uncertainties are not included.

Prompt and non-prompt production cross-section times branching ratio as a function of $J/\psi$ $p_{\rm T}$ for $J/\psi$ rapidity interval of $0.75\leq |y| < 1.5$. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic. Spin-alignment and luminosity ($\pm 1.8\%$) uncertainties are not included.

Prompt and non-prompt production cross-section times branching ratio as a function of $J/\psi$ $p_{\rm T}$ for $J/\psi$ rapidity interval of $1.5\leq |y| < 2$. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic. Spin-alignment and luminosity ($\pm 1.8\%$) uncertainties are not included.

Expected and observed event yields for signal regions with at least 7 jets as a function of transverse momentum requirements.

Expected and observed event yields for signal regions with at least 7 jets with at least 1 b-tag as a function of transverse momentum requirements.

Expected and observed event yields for signal regions with at least 7 jets with at least 2 b-tags as a function of transverse momentum requirements.

Table showing the predicted yields in the SM and observed number of events in SR1 as well as all signal mass points.

Table showing the predicted yields in the SM and observed number of events in SR100 as well as three representative signal scenarios.

Table showing the predicted yields in the SM and observed number of events in SR250 as well as three representative signal scenarios.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour using the best expected limit from SR100 or SR250.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour using the best expected limit from SR100 or SR250.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour using the best expected limit from the jet-counting analysis when using signal regions without b-tag requirements.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour using the best expected limit from the jet-counting analysis when using signal regions without b-tag requirements.

Expected 95% CL exclusion contour using the best expected limit from the jet-counting analysis when allowing b-tags.

Observed 95% CL exclusion contour using the best expected limit from the jet-counting analysis when allowing b-tags.

Observed cross-section exclusion in units of pb at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the resolved analysis when b-tags are not allowed.

Observed cross-section exclusion in units of pb at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the resolved analysis when b-tags are allowed.

Observed cross-section exclusion in units of pb at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR1 is used for each mass point.

Expected exclusion contour at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR1 is used for each mass point.

Observed exclusion contour at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR1 is used for each mass point.

Observed cross-section exclusion in units of pb at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR100 is used for each mass point.

Expected exclusion contour at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR100 is used for each mass point.

Observed exclusion contour at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR100 is used for each mass point.

Observed cross-section exclusion in units of pb at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR250 is used for each mass point.

Expected exclusion contour at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR250 is used for each mass point.

Observed exclusion contour at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when SR250 is used for each mass point.

Observed cross-section exclusion in units of pb at 95% C.L., in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, for the merged analysis, when the best SR is used for each mass point.

Acceptance times efficiency in the gluino/neutralino mass plane, when SR1 is used in each point.

Signal acceptance times efficiency for signal regions with at least 7 jets as a function of transverse momentum requirements.

Signal acceptance times efficiency for signal regions with at least 7 jets with at least 1 b-tag as a function of transverse momentum requirements.

Signal acceptance times efficiency for signal regions with at least 7 jets with at least 2 b-tags as a function of transverse momentum requirements.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 1.5 <= |y| < 2.0 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.4. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 2.0 <= |y| < 2.5 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.4. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 2.5 <= |y| < 3.0 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.4. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 0.0 <= |y| < 0.5 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.6. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 0.5 <= |y| < 1.0 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.6. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 1.0 <= |y| < 1.5 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.6. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 1.5 <= |y| < 2.0 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.6. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 2.0 <= |y| < 2.5 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.6. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

Measured double-differential inclusive-jet cross section for the range 2.5 <= |y| < 3.0 and for anti-kT jets with radius parameter R = 0.6. It is based on the data sample of proton-proton collisions at 7 TeV of centre-of-mass energy collected in 2011 by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC. The data sample corresponds to the integrated luminosity of 4.5 fb^-1. The statistical uncertainties arising from data and MC simulation have been combined. All the components of the systematic uncertainty are shown. They are: all the components of the jet energy scale uncertainty (jesX), the uncertainty of the jet energy resolution (jer), the uncertainty of the jet angular resolution (jar), the uncertainty of data unfolding (unfold), the uncertainty of the jet quality selection (qual), the luminosity uncertainty (lumi). All the components are assumed to be independent of each other. Each component is assumed to be fully correlated in pT and eta. Concerning the shape of the different components, Gaussian distribution assumption works for most of them. The three columns correspond to three different sets of the systematic uncertainty built with nominal, stronger or weaker assumptions on correlations between the jet energy scale uncertainty components. For more information on the systematic uncertainties, see the reference paper.

The observed 95\% C.L. limit for $pp\rightarrow G^{*}_{KK}\rightarrow hh\rightarrow b\bar{b}b\bar{b}$ in the bulk RS model with $k/\bar{M}_{Pl} = 2$, as a function of resonance mass.

The observed 95\% C.L. limit for $pp\rightarrow H\rightarrow hh\rightarrow b\bar{b}b\bar{b}$ with fixed $\Gamma_{H} = 1$ GeV, as a function of resonance mass.

The stransverse mass mT2 in the W+jets validation region VR2 for the two-tau MVA analysis.

The BDT response prior to applying the SR BDT requirement for the two-tau MVA analysis.

The missing transverse energy ETmiss in the two-tau MVA signal region.

The effective mass meff in the two-tau MVA signal region.

The stransverse mass mT2 in the two-tau MVA signal region.

The ratio R2 in the signal region SR2l-1a SF from the two-lepton, opposite-sign analysis, prior to the requirement on this variable.

The ratio R2 in the signal region SR2l-1a DF from the two-lepton, opposite-sign analysis, prior to the requirement on this variable.

The super razor quantity MdR in the signal region SR2l-1b SF from the two-lepton, opposite-sign analysis, prior to the requirement on this variable.

The super razor quantity MdR in the signal region SR2l-1b DF from the two-lepton, opposite-sign analysis, prior to the requirement on this variable.

The separation in phi between the leading jet and the missing transverse momentum dPhi(jet 1,ETmiss) in the ISR validation region of the two-lepton, same-sign MVA analysis.

The transverse mass using the leading lepton mTlep1 in the ISR validation region of the two-lepton, same-sign MVA analysis.

The transverse mass using the second leading lepton mTlep2 in the no-ISR validation region of the two-lepton, same-sign MVA analysis.

The scalar sum of the pT of the leptons and jets, HT in the no-ISR validation region of the two-lepton, same-sign MVA analysis.

The three-lepton invariant mass mlll in the validation region VR3l-0a from the three-lepton analysis.

The missing transverse energy ETmiss in the validation region VR3l-0b from the three-lepton analysis.

The transverse momentum of the leading jet pTjet1 in the validation region VR3l-1a from the three-lepton analysis.

The missing transverse energy ETmiss in the validation region VR3l-1b from the three-lepton analysis.

The missing transverse energy ETmiss in the signal region SR3l-0a from the three-lepton analysis.

The three-lepton invariant mass mlll in the signal region SR3l-0b from the three-lepton analysis.

The separation in phi between the leading jet and the missing transverse momentum dPhi(jet 1,ETmiss) in the signal region SR3l-1a from the three-lepton analysis.

The transverse momentum of the leading jet pTjet1 in the signal region SR3l-1b from the three-lepton analysis.

The transverse momentum of the second leading jet pTjet2 in the VV validation region from the same-sign two-lepton VBF analysis.

The invariant mass of the two leading jets mjj in the VV validation region from the same-sign two-lepton VBF analysis.

The transverse momentum of the second leading lepton pTlep2 in the Fakes validation region from the same-sign two-lepton VBF analysis.

The missing transverse momentum ETmiss in the Fakes validation region from the same-sign two-lepton VBF analysis.

The invariant mass of the two leading jets mjj in the same-sign, two lepton VBF signal region.

The separation in eta between the two leading jets dEtajj in the same-sign, two lepton VBF signal region.

The missing transverse energy ETmiss in the same-sign, two lepton VBF signal region.

The transverse momentum of the second leading lepton pTlep2 in the same-sign, two lepton VBF signal region.

The 95% CL exclusion limits (expected and observed) on the cross-section for production of left- and right-handed stau pairs for various LSP masses.

The 95% CL exclusion limits (expected and observed) on the cross-section for CHARGINO1+ CHARGINO1- production with SLEPTONL-mediated decays, where the LSP is massless and the intermediate slepton mass is set to 5%, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% of the CHARGINO1+- mass (x).

The expected 95% CL exclusion limits for CHARGINO1+ CHARGINO1- production with SLEPTONL-mediated decays as a function of the CHARGINO1+- and NEUTRALINO1 masses.

The observed 95% CL exclusion limits for CHARGINO1+ CHARGINO1- production with SLEPTONL-mediated decays as a function of the CHARGINO1+- and NEUTRALINO1 masses.

The expected and observed 95% CL exclusion limits on the cross-section for VBF CHARGINO1+-CHARGINO1+- production, as a function of the CHARGINO1-NEUTRALINO1 mass difference, for a CHARGINO1+- of 110 GeV.

The 95% CL exclusion limits (expected and observed) on the cross-section for NEUTRALINO2 NEUTRALINO3 production with SLEPTONR-mediated decays, where the LSP is massless and the intermediate slepton mass is set to 5%, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% of the NEUTRALINO2 mass (x).

The expected 95% CL exclusion limits for NEUTRALINO2 NEUTRALINO3 production with SLEPTONR-mediated decays as a function of the NEUTRALINO2 and NEUTRALINO1 masses.

The observed 95% CL exclusion limits for NEUTRALINO2 NEUTRALINO3 production with SLEPTONR-mediated decays as a function of the NEUTRALINO2 and NEUTRALINO1 masses.

The 95% CL exclusion limits (expected and observed) on the cross-section for CHARGINO1+- NEUTRALINO2 production with SLEPTONL-mediated decays, where the LSP is massless and the intermediate slepton mass is set to 5%, 25%, 50%, 75%, and 95% of the CHARGINO1+- mass (x).

The expected 95% CL exclusion limits for CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 production with SLEPTONL-mediated decays (x=0.50) as a function of the NEUTRALINO2 and NEUTRALINO1 masses.

The observed 95% CL exclusion limits for CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 production with SLEPTONL-mediated decays (x=0.50) as a function of the NEUTRALINO2 and NEUTRALINO1 masses.

The expected 95% CL exclusion limits for CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 production with SLEPTONL-mediated decays (x=0.95) as a function of the NEUTRALINO2 and NEUTRALINO1 masses.

The observed 95% CL exclusion limits for CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 production with SLEPTONL-mediated decays (x=0.95) as a function of the NEUTRALINO2 and NEUTRALINO1 masses.

The expected 95% CL exclusion limits for CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 production with STAU-mediated decays as a function of the NEUTRALINO2 and NEUTRALINO1 masses.

The observed 95% CL exclusion limits for CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 production with STAU-mediated decays as a function of the NEUTRALINO2 and NEUTRALINO1 masses.

The expected 95% CL exclusion limits in the pMSSM scenario.

The observed 95% CL exclusion limits in the pMSSM scenario.

The expected 95% CL exclusion limits in the NUHM2 scenario.

The observed 95% CL exclusion limits in the NUHM2 scenario.

The expected 95% CL exclusion limits in the GMSB scenario.

The observed 95% CL exclusion limits in the GMSB scenario.

The best expected signal region in the direct STAUL STAUL SUSY model, where "1" indicates the two-tau MVA signal region is used, and "2" indicates the previously published signal regions are used.

The number of generated events in the direct STAUL STAUL SUSY model.

The cross-section in the direct STAUL STAUL SUSY model.

The experimental uncertainty in the two-tau MVA signal region in the direct STAUL STAUL SUSY model.

The expected CLs in the two-tau MVA signal region in the direct STAUL STAUL SUSY model.

The observed CLs in the two-tau MVA signal region in the direct STAUL STAUL SUSY model.

The 95% CL upper limit on the SUSY cross-section in the CHARGINO1+CHARGINO1- SUSY model using the opposite-sign, two-lepton analysis.

The best expected signal region in the CHARGINO1+CHARGINO1- SUSY model using the opposite-sign, two-lepton analysis, where "1" denotes SR2l-1a and "2" denotes SR2l-1b.

The number of generated events in the CHARGINO1+CHARGINO1- SUSY model.

The total cross-section in the CHARGINO1+CHARGINO1- SUSY model.

The acceptance for the opposite-sign, two-lepton signal region SR2l-1b in the CHARGINO1+CHARGINO1- SUSY model.

The efficiency for the opposite-sign, two-lepton signal region SR2l-1b in the CHARGINO1+CHARGINO1- SUSY model.

The experimental uncertainty for the opposite-sign, two-lepton signal region SR2l-1b in the CHARGINO1+CHARGINO1- SUSY model.

The expected CLs for the opposite-sign, two-lepton signal region SR2l-1b in the CHARGINO1+CHARGINO1- SUSY model.

The observed CLs for the opposite-sign, two-lepton signal region SR2l-1b in the CHARGINO1+CHARGINO1- SUSY model.

The number of generated events in the VBF CHARGINO1+- CHARGINO1+- VBF SUSY model, where m(CHARGINO1+-)=m(NEUTRALINO2) and x=0.5.

The total cross-section in the VBF CHARGINO1+- CHARGINO1+- SUSY model, where m(CHARGINO1+-)=m(NEUTRALINO2) and x=0.5.

The acceptance for the same-sign, two-lepton VBF signal region in the VBF CHARGINO1+- CHARGINO1+- SUSY model, where m(CHARGINO1+-)=m(NEUTRALINO2) and x=0.5.

The efficiency for the same-sign, two-lepton VBF signal region in the VBF CHARGINO1+- CHARGINO1+- SUSY model, where m(CHARGINO1+-)=m(NEUTRALINO2) and x=0.5.

The experimental uncertainty for the same-sign, two-lepton VBF signal region in the VBF CHARGINO1+- CHARGINO1+- SUSY model, where m(CHARGINO1+-)=m(NEUTRALINO2) and x=0.5.

The expected CLs for the same-sign, two-lepton VBF signal region in the VBF CHARGINO1+- CHARGINO1+- SUSY model, where m(CHARGINO1+-)=m(NEUTRALINO2) and x=0.5.

The observed CLs for the same-sign, two-lepton VBF signal region in the VBF CHARGINO1+- CHARGINO1+- SUSY model, where m(CHARGINO1+-)=m(NEUTRALINO2) and x=0.5.

The best expected signal region in the same-sign, two-lepton MVA analysis for the CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 SUSY model (x=0.5), where "1" indicates SR dM20, "2" indicates SR dM35, "3" indicates SR dM65, and "4" indicates SR dM100.

The number of generated events in the CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 SUSY model (x=0.5).

The total cross-section in the CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 SUSY model (x=0.5).

The experimental uncertainty in the same-sign, two-lepton MVA signal region SR dM20 for the CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 SUSY model (x=0.5).

The expected CLs in the same-sign, two-lepton MVA signal region SR dM20 for the CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 SUSY model (x=0.5).

The observed CLs in the same-sign, two-lepton MVA signal region SR dM20 for the CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 SUSY model (x=0.5).

The acceptance in the three-lepton signal region SR3l-1b for the CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 SUSY model (x=0.5).

The efficiency in the three-lepton signal region SR3l-1b for the CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 SUSY model (x=0.5).

The experimental uncertainty in the three-lepton signal region SR3l-1b for the CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 SUSY model (x=0.5).

The expected CLs in the three-lepton signal region SR3l-1b for the CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 SUSY model (x=0.5).

The observed CLs in the three-lepton signal region SR3l-1b for the CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 SUSY model (x=0.5).

The best expected signal region in the same-sign, two-lepton MVA analysis for the CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 SUSY model (x=0.95), where "1" indicates SR dM20, "2" indicates SR dM35, "3" indicates SR dM65, and "4" indicates SR dM100.

The 95% CL upper limit on the SUSY cross-section in the CHARGINO1+-NEUTRALINO2 SUSY model with STAU-mediated decays.

The 95% CL upper limit on the SUSY cross-section in the NEUTRALINO2 NEUTRALINO3 SUSY model.

Expected exclusion limits in the gluino-neutralino mass plane, for the higgsino-bino GGM model with $\mu < 0$, using the merged $\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{L}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{H}$ analyses.

Observed exclusion limits in the $M_3$-$\mu$ plane, for the higgsino-bino GGM model with $\mu > 0$, using the merged $\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$ analyses.

Expected exclusion limits in the $M_3$-$\mu$ plane, for the higgsino-bino GGM model with $\mu > 0$, using the merged $\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$ analyses.

Contour of exclusion in wino production cross section from the photon+$\ell$ analysis, as a function of the wino mass parameter $m_{\tilde{W}}$. The expected limit is shown along with its $\pm 1$ and $\pm 2$ standard deviation values.

Numbers of selected data events at progressive stages of the selection, for each SR for the diphoton, photon+j and photon+$\ell$ analyses. Where no number is shown the cut was not applied.

Expected number of signal events at progressive stages of the selection, shown for points in the parameter space that typify the region for which each selection of the diphoton, photon+j and photon+$\ell$ analyses is optimized, and scaled to an integrated luminosity of $20.3\,\mathrm{fb}^{-1}$. Where no number is shown the cut was not applied.

Expected number of signal events at progressive stages of the $\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{H}$ selection, shown for data and signal Monte Carlo datasets.

Expected number of signal events at progressive stages of the $\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{L}$ selection, shown for data and signal Monte Carlo datasets.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}}$ between 1550 and 1600 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}} = 1500$ GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}}$ between 1350 and 1450 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}}$ between 1250 and 1300 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}}$ between 1150 and 1200 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{S-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency across the strong-production parameter space, for $m_{\tilde{g}}$ between 1000 and 1100 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for $m_{\tilde{W}}$ between 650 and 800 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for $m_{\tilde{W}}$ between 400 and 600 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-H}$ and $\rm{SR}^{\gamma\gamma}_{W-L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for $m_{\tilde{W}}$ between 100 and 400 GeV.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{H}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for combined strong and weak production across the $\mu<0$ higgsino-bino parameter space.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma b}_{L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for combined strong and weak production across the $\mu<0$ higgsino-bino parameter space.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{H}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for combined strong and weak production across the $\mu>0$ higgsino-bino parameter space.

$\rm{SR}^{\gamma j}_{L}$ signal acceptance*efficiency for combined strong and weak production across the $\mu>0$ higgsino-bino parameter space.

Acceptance-times-efficiency (a*e) for the photon+$\ell$ analysis SRs.

The total NLO+NLL strong production cross sections with uncertainties for GGM gluino-neutralino signal points for the diphoton and photon+b analyses. In the variant of the grid used in the diphoton analysis, the electroweak production cross section is negligible.

The total NLO cross sections with uncertainties for GGM wino-bino signal points, for all final states, for the diphoton analysis. The direct bino production cross section is negligible.

The NLO gaugino pair production cross sections with relative uncertainties for GGM gluino-neutralino signal points for the photon+b analysis.

The best signal region used for each signal point in the photon+b analysis.

The total NLO+NLL cross sections with uncertainties for the strong production GGM signal grid for the photon+j analysis.

The total NLO cross sections with uncertainties for the electroweak production GGM signal grid for the photon+j analysis.

The best signal region used for each signal point in the photon+j analysis.

Combined exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t + \tilde{\chi}_1^0 $ with branching ratio x and through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ with branching ratio 1-x. This table is for the observed limit for BR=75% - Observed limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d63 - Expected limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d64.

Combined exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t + \tilde{\chi}_1^0 $ with branching ratio x and through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ with branching ratio 1-x. This table is for the expected limit for BR=75% - Observed limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d63 - Expected limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d64.

Combined exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t + \tilde{\chi}_1^0 $ with branching ratio x and through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ with branching ratio 1-x. Observed limit for BR=50% - Observed limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d63 - Expected limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d64.

Combined exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t + \tilde{\chi}_1^0 $ with branching ratio x and through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ with branching ratio 1-x. Expected limit for BR=50% - Observed limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d63 - Expected limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d64.

Combined exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t + \tilde{\chi}_1^0 $ with branching ratio x and through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ with branching ratio 1-x. Observed limit for BR=25% - Observed limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d63 - Expected limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d64.

Combined exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t + \tilde{\chi}_1^0 $ with branching ratio x and through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ with branching ratio 1-x. Expected limit for BR=25% - Observed limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d63 - Expected limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d64.

Combined exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t + \tilde{\chi}_1^0 $ with branching ratio x and through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ with branching ratio 1-x. Observed limit for BR=0% - Observed limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d63 - Expected limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d64.

Combined exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t + \tilde{\chi}_1^0 $ with branching ratio x and through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm $ with branching ratio 1-x. Expected limit for BR=0% - Observed limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d63 - Expected limit x=BR=100% See Fig 24. hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d64.

Summary of the ATLAS Run 1 searches for direct stop pair production in models where the decay mode $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}$ with $ \tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm} \rightarrow W \tilde{\chi_1^0}$ is assumed with a branching ratio of 100%. Limits for the b0L and t1L soft-lepton analyses in two scenarios Delta M = 5 GeV in light green and Delta M = 20 GeV in dark green), for a total of four limits - dM=5 GeV, b0L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d19 - dM=5 GeV, b0L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d22 - dM=5 GeV, t1L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d40 - dM=5 GeV, t1L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d41 - dM=20 GeV, b0L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d25 - dM=20 GeV, b0L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d28 - dM=20 GeV, t1L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d43 - dM=20 GeV, t1L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d44.

Summary of the ATLAS Run 1 searches for direct stop pair production in models where the decay mode $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}$ with $ \tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm} \rightarrow W \tilde{\chi_1^0}$ is assumed with a branching ratio of 100%.Limits for the b0L, t1L and t2L analyses in scenarios with a fixed chargino mass of 106 GeV (dark green) and 150 GeV (light green) - M(ch1)=150 GeV, b0L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d13 - M(ch1)=150 GeV, b0L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d16 - M(ch1)=150 GeV, t1L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d34 - M(ch1)=150 GeV, t1L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d35 - M(ch1)=106 GeV, t1L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d37 - M(ch1)=106 GeV, t1L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d38 - M(ch1)=106 GeV, t2L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286444/d25 - M(ch1)=106 GeV, t2L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286444/d26.

Summary of the ATLAS Run 1 searches for direct stop pair production in models where the decay mode $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}$ with $ \tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm} \rightarrow W \tilde{\chi_1^0}$ is assumed with a branching ratio of 100%.Limits for the t1L and t2L analyses in scenarios with the mass of the chargino set to twice the mass of the neutralino - M(ch1)=2M(chi0), t1L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d31 - M(ch1)=2M(chi0), t1L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d32 - M(ch1)=2M(chi0), t2L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286444/d16 - M(ch1)=2M(chi0), t2L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286444/d17.

Summary of the ATLAS Run 1 searches for direct stop pair production in models where the decay mode $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}$ with $ \tilde{\chi}_1^{\pm} \rightarrow W \tilde{\chi_1^0}$ is assumed with a branching ratio of 100%.Limits for the t1L and t2L and WW analyses in scenarios with the mass difference between chargino and neutralino is 10 GeV - dM=10 GeV, t1L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d46 - dM=10 GeV, t1L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d47 - dM=10 GeV, t2L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286444/d10 - dM=10 GeV, t2L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286444/d11 - dM=10 GeV, WW observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d45 - dM=10 GeV, WW expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1380183/d46.

Exclusion limits assuming that the stop decays through $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b + \tilde{\chi}_1^\pm + W^{(*)} + \tilde{\chi}_1^0$ with branching ratio of 100% assuming a fixed stop mass of 300 GeV. - t1L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d49 - t1L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d50 - b0L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d7 - b0L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d10.

Exclusion limits at 95% CL in the scenario where $\tilde{t}_2$ pair production is assumed, followed by the decay $\tilde{t}_2 \rightarrow Z \tilde{t}_1$ or $\tilde{t}_2 \rightarrow \tilde{t}_1 h$ and then by $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t \tilde{\chi}_1^0$ with a branching ratio of 100%, as a function of the $\tilde{t}_2$ and $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass. The $\tilde{t}_1$ mass is 180 GeV larger than the neutralino mass. This table is for the t2t1H observed limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d11 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d8.

Exclusion limits at 95% CL in the scenario where $\tilde{t}_2$ pair production is assumed, followed by the decay $\tilde{t}_2 \rightarrow Z \tilde{t}_1$ or $\tilde{t}_2 \rightarrow \tilde{t}_1 h$ and then by $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t \tilde{\chi}_1^0$ with a branching ratio of 100%, as a function of the $\tilde{t}_2$ and $\tilde{\chi}_1^0$ mass. The $\tilde{t}_1$ mass is 180 GeV larger than the neutralino mass. This table is for the t2t1H expected limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d11 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d8.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=350 GeV and m(chi1)=20 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t2t1H observed limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d14 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d15.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=350 GeV and m(chi1)=20 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t2t1H expected limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d14 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d15.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=350 GeV and m(chi1)=20 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t1L/t0L observed limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d14 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d15.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=350 GeV and m(chi1)=20 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t1L/t0L expected limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d14 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d15.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=500 GeV and m(chi1)=20 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t2t1H observed limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d16 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d17.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=500 GeV and m(chi1)=20 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t2t1H expected limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d16 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d17.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=500 GeV and m(chi1)=20 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t1L/t0L observed limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d16 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d17.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=500 GeV and m(chi1)=20 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t1Lt0L expected limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d16 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d17.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=500 GeV and m(chi1)=120 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t2t1H observed limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d18 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d19.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=500 GeV and m(chi1)=120 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t2t1H expected limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d18 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d19.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=500 GeV and m(chi1)=120 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t1L/t0L observed limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d18 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d19.

Exclusion limits as a function of the stop2 branching ratio for decays into Z, Higgs and neutralino. m(t2)=500 GeV and m(chi1)=120 GeV (top plot). This table is for the t1Lt0L expected limit. - t2t1Z observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d18 - t2t1Z expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286622/d19.

Observed and expected 95% CL limits on sbottom pair production where the sbottom is assumed to decay as b1->b chi10 with a branching ratio of 100%. - b0L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d1 - b0L expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1247462/d4 - tc observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304459 (root macro) - tc expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304459 (root macro).

Exclusion limits at 95% CL for a scenario where sbottoms are pair produced and decay as b1 -> t chi1+ with a BR of 100% - SS3L observed limit (mchi+=60 GeV): hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/resource/6164/finalExclusionGraphs/SBottomTopCharginoN60_observed.C - SS3L expected limit (mchi+=60 GeV): hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/resource/6164/finalExclusionGraphs/SBottomTopCharginoN60_expected.C - SS3L observed limit (mchi+=2 mchi0): hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/resource/6164/finalExclusionGraphs/SBottomTopCharginoNhalfC_observed.C - SS3L expected limit (mchi+=2 mchi0): hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/resource/6164/finalExclusionGraphs/SBottomTopCharginoNhalfC_expected.C.

Exclusion limits at 95% CL for a scenario where sbottoms are pair produced and decay as b1 -> b chi2 with a BR of 100% - g3b observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304457/d10 - g3b expected limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304457/d11.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for the naturalness-inspired set of pMSSM models from the combination t0L, t1L and tb analyses using the signal region yielding the smallest CLs value for the signal- plus-background hypothesis. This table is for the observed limit.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for the naturalness-inspired set of pMSSM models from the combination t0L, t1L and tb analyses using the signal region yielding the smallest CLs value for the signal- plus-background hypothesis. This table is for the expected limit.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for the pMSSM model with well-tempered neutralinos as a function of M1 and mqL3. The limit is obtained as the combination of the t0L, t1L, tb and SS3L analyses, This table is for the observed limit.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for the pMSSM model with well-tempered neutralinos as a function of M1 and mqL3. The limit is obtained as the combination of the t0L, t1L, tb and SS3L analyses, This table is for the expected limit.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for the pMSSM model with well-tempered neutralinos as a function of M1 and mtR. The limit is obtained using the t0L analysis. This table is for the observed limit.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for the pMSSM model with well-tempered neutralinos as a function of M1 and mtR. The limit is obtained using the t0L analysis. This table is for the expected limit.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for the set of h/Z-enriched pMSSM models as a function of $\mu$ and m(qL3). The limit of is obtained as the combination of the t0L, g3b, t2t1Z and SS3L analyses, This table is for the observed limit.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for the set of h/Z-enriched pMSSM models as a function of $\mu$ and m(qL3). The limit of is obtained as the combination of the t0L, g3b, t2t1Z and SS3L analyses, This table is for the expected limit.

Observed 95% CL exclusion limits for the set of h/Z-enriched pMSSM models as a function of $\mu$ and m(bR). The limit of is obtained as the combination of thet0L, t2t1Z and tb analyses, This table is for the observed limit.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for the set of h/Z-enriched pMSSM models as a function of $\mu$ and m(bR). The limit of is obtained as the combination of thet0L, t2t1Z and tb analyses, This table is for the expected limit.

Expected and observed 95% CL limits on the signal strength mu (defined as the ratio of the obtained stop cross section to the theoretical prediction) for the production of stop pairs as a function of m(stop). The stop is assumed to decay as t1->t chi0 or through its three-body decay depending on its mass. The neutralino is assumed to have a mass of 1 GeV.

Exclusion limits at 95% CL in the scenario where both pair-produced stop decay exclusively via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \chi^\pm_1$ followed by $\chi^\pm_1 \rightarrow W \chi_1^0$ with $\Delta m(t_1, \chi_1^0)$ = 10 GeV. This table is for the observed limit.

Exclusion limits at 95% CL in the scenario where both pair-produced stop decay exclusively via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \chi^\pm_1$ followed by $\chi^\pm_1 \rightarrow W \chi_1^0$ with $\Delta m(t_1, \chi_1^0)$ = 10 GeV. This table is for the expected limit.

Exclusion limits at 95% CL in the scenario where both pair-produced stop decay exclusively via three-body or four-body decay (depending on the neutralino and stop mass). This table is for the observed limit. - t1L observed limit (3-body) hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d25 - t1L observed limit (4-body) hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d28 - t2L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286444/d23.

Exclusion limits at 95% CL in the scenario where both pair-produced stop decay exclusively via three-body or four-body decay (depending on the neutralino and stop mass). This table is for the expected limit. - t1L observed limit (3-body) hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d25 - t1L observed limit (4-body) hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1304456/d28 - t2L observed limit hepdata.cedar.ac.uk/view/ins1286444/d23.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 25% and DM=5GeV. This table is for the Observed limit.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 25% and DM=5GeV. This table is for the Expected limit.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 25% and DM=20 GeV. This table is for the Observed limit.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 25% and DM=20 GeV. This table is for the Expected limit.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 50% and DM=5GeV. This table is for the Observed limit.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 50% and DM=5 GeV. This table is for the Expected limit.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 50% and DM=20GeV. This table is for the Observed limit.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 50% and DM=20 GeV. This table is for the Expected limit.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 75% and DM=5GeV. This table is for the Observed limit.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 75% and DM=5 GeV. This table is for the Expected limit.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 75% and DM=20GeV. This table is for the Observed limit.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions for simplified models with stop decays into both stop1->t chi10 and stop1-> b ch1 for BR(stop1->t chi10) = 75% and DM=20 GeV. This table is for the Expected limit.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions in the natural pMSSM model. This table is for the Observed limit.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from the tb signal regions in the natural pMSSM model. This table is for the Expected limit.

Combined exclusion limits at 95% CL in the scenario where both stops decay exclusively via $\tilde t_1 \rightarrow t \tilde \chi_1^0 $. Observed limit contour line for the t0L/t1L combination.

Combined exclusion limits at 95% CL in the scenario where both stops decay exclusively via $\tilde t_1 \rightarrow t \tilde \chi_1^0 $. Expected limit contour line for the t0L/t1L combination.

Best expected SR for the WW analysis and the three- and four-body decays.

Cross-section upper limit for the WW analysis and the three- and four-body decays.

Expected CLs for the WW analysis and the 3- and 4-body decays.

Observed CLs for the WW analysis and the 3- and 4-body decays.

Best expected SR for the WW analysis and the stop1->chargino1 decay.

Cross section upper limit for the WW analysis and the stop1->chargino1 decay.

Expected CLs for the WW analysis and the stop1->chargino1 decay.

Observed CLs for the WW analysis and the stop1->chargino1 decay.

Cross section upper limit for the t2t1h analysis.

Expected CLs for the t2t1h analysis.

Observed CLs for the t2t1h analysis.

Best expected SR for the tb analysis in the pMSSM model.

Cross section upper limit for the tb analysis in the pMSSM model.

Efficiency for the SRinA signal region for the pMSSM model.

Efficiency for the SRinB signal region for the pMSSM model.

Efficiency for the SRinC signal region for the pMSSM model.

Efficiency for the SRexA signal region for the pMSSM model.

Best expected SR for the tb analysis in the simplified model with Delta(m) = 5 GeV and BR=50%.

Cross section upper limit for the tb analysis in the simplified model with Delta(m) = 5 GeV and BR=50%.

Best expected SR for the tb analysis in the simplified model with Delta(m) = 20 GeV and BR=50%.

Cross section upper limit for the tb analysis in the simplified model with Delta(m) = 20 GeV and BR=50%.

Best expected SR and cross section upper limit for the tb analysis in the simplified model with Delta(m) = 5 GeV and BR=25%.

Best expected SR and cross section upper limit for the tb analysis in the simplified model with Delta(m) = 20 GeV and BR=25%.

Best expected SR and cross section upper limit for the tb analysis in the simplified model with Delta(m) = 5 GeV and BR=75%.

Best expected SR and cross section upper limit for the tb analysis in the simplified model with Delta(m) = 20 GeV and BR=75%.

Exclusion limits for the naturalness-inspired set of pMSSM models from the combination t0L, t1L and tb analyses using the signal region yielding the smallest CLs value for the signal- plus-background hypothesis. This table is for the best expected signal region.

95% CL exclusion limits for the pMSSM model with well-tempered neutralinos as a function of M1 and mqL3. The limit is obtained as the combination of the t0L, t1L, tb and SS3L analyses, This table is for the best expected signal region.

Expected 95% CL exclusion limits for the pMSSM model with well-tempered neutralinos as a function of M1 and mtR. The limit is obtained using the t0L analysis. This table is for the best expected signal region.

95% CL exclusion limits for the set of h/Z-enriched pMSSM models as a function of $\mu$ and m(qL3). The limit of is obtained as the combination of the t0L, g3b, t2t1Z and SS3L analyses, This table is for the best expected signal region.

95% CL exclusion limits for the set of h/Z-enriched pMSSM models as a function of $\mu$ and m(bR). The limit of is obtained as the combination of the t0L, t2t1Z and tb analyses, This table is for the best expected signal region.

Acceptance times efficiency for the tight channel of the Razor analysis for the direct squark-squark model.

Acceptance for the 1tau channel of the Taus+jets+MET analysis for the gluino simplified model.

Efficiency for the 1tau channel of the Taus+jets+MET analysis for the gluino simplified model.

Acceptance for the 2tau channel of the Taus+jets+MET analysis for the gluino simplified model.

Efficiency for the 2tau channel of the Taus+jets+MET analysis for the gluino simplified model.

Acceptance for the 1tau channel of the Taus+jets+MET analysis for the squark simplified model.

Efficiency for the 1tau channel of the Taus+jets+MET analysis for the squark simplified model.

Acceptance for the 2tau channel of the Taus+jets+MET analysis for the squark simplified model.

Efficiency for the 2tau channel of the Taus+jets+MET analysis for the squark simplified model.

Observed limit on the cross-section times branching ratio in fb at 95% CL for the direct squark-squark model.

Observed limit on the cross-section times branching ratio in fb at 95% CL for the gluino simplified model, obtained by the Taus+jets+MET analysis.

Observed limit on the cross-section times branching ratio in fb at 95% CL for the squark simplified model, obtained by the Taus+jets+MET analysis.

Observed 95% CL cross section times branching ratio upper limit on pMSSM qLqL production with M1=60 GeV and $m_{\tilde g}=$1.6 TeV interpreted by the 0L analysis including its two dedicated signal regions.

Observed 95% CL cross section times branching ratio upper limit on pMSSM qLqL production with M2=(M1+mqL)/2 and $m_{\tilde g}=$1.6 TeV interpreted by the 0L analysis including its two dedicated signal regions.

Observed 95% CL cross section times branching ratio upper limit on pMSSM qLqL production with M1=60 GeV with $m_{\tilde g}=$2.2 TeV interpreted by the 0L analysis including its two dedicated signal regions.

Observed 95% CL cross section times branching ratio upper limit on pMSSM qLqL production with M2=(M1+mqL)/2 and $m_{\tilde g}=$2.2 TeV interpreted by the 0L analysis including its two dedicated signal regions.

Observed 95% CL cross section times branching ratio upper limit on pMSSM qLqL production with M1=60 GeV and $m_{\tilde g}=$3.0 TeV interpreted by the 0L analysis including its two dedicated signal regions.

Observed 95% CL cross section times branching ratio upper limit on pMSSM qLqL production with M2=(M1+mqL)/2 and $m_{\tilde g}=$3.0 TeV interpreted by the 0L analysis including its two dedicated signal regions.

Observed and expected limits on the cross-section times branching ratio in fb at 95% CL for the gluino-mediated stop model with off-shell stops, for mass points with four- or five-body gluino decays, obtained by the SS/3L and 0/1L3B analyses.

: Cut flow for signal regions 0L_4jt+ and 0L_5jt of baseline signal points normalized to 20.3 fb$^\mathrm{-1}$. The point used for the 0L_4jt+ cutflow is mqL = 1150 GeV, M1 = 60 GeV, M2 = 1000 GeV, m(gluino) = 2200 GeV. The point used for the 0L_5jt cutflow is mqL = 950 GeV, M1 = 100 GeV, M2 = 525 GeV, m(gluino) = 2200 GeV.

Cut flow for the 1L(H)_7-jet SR (electron channel) for the main background from the $t\bar{t}$ production. The events are normalized to 20.3 fb$^\mathrm{-1}$.

Cut flow for the 1L(H)_7-jet SR (muon channel) for the main background from the $t\bar{t}$ production. The events are normalized to 20.3 fb$^\mathrm{-1}$.

Cut flow for 1L(H)_7-jet SR (electron channel). The signal point is taken from the gluino simplified model with 1-step decay via charginos and parameters $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1145 GeV, $m_{{\tilde \chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 785 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 425 GeV; 20000 events were generated for this point. The events are normalized to 20.3 fb$^\mathrm{-1}$.

Cut flow for 1L(H)_7-jet SR (muon channel). The signal point is taken from the gluino simplified model with 1-step decay via charginos and parameters $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1145 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 785 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 425 GeV; 20000 events were generated for this point. The events are normalized to 20.3 fb$^\mathrm{-1}$.

Cut flow for 1L(H)_7-jet SR (electron channel). The signal point is taken from the gluino simplified model with 1-step decay via charginos and parameters $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1025 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 545 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 65 GeV; 20000 events were generated for this point. The events are normalized to 20.3 fb$^\mathrm{-1}$.

Cut flow for 1L(H)_7-jet SR (muon channel). The signal point is taken from the gluino simplified model with 1-step decay via charginos and parameters $m_{\tilde{g}}$ = 1025 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{\pm}}$ = 545 GeV, $m_{\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}}$ = 65 GeV; 20000 events were generated for this point. The events are normalized to 20.3 fb$^\mathrm{-1}$.

Cut flow for 0LRaz_SR$_{\rm loose}$ and 0LRaz_SR$_{\rm tight}$ signal regions of baseline signal point ($m(\tilde{q}, \tilde{\chi}_1^0)=(850, 100)$ GeV) normalized to 20.3 fb$^{-1}$. 5000 events were generated for ths point.

The $\delta m=m_{3\ell}-m_{ell^+\ell^-}$ distributions for the $3\ell+jj$ category and $Z+\mu$ flavor channel.

The $\delta m=m_{3\ell}-m_{ell^+\ell^-}$ distributions for the $3\ell$-only category and $Z+e$ flavor channel.

The $\delta m=m_{3\ell}-m_{ell^+\ell^-}$ distributions for the $3\ell$-only category and $Z+\mu$ flavor channel.

95\% CL upper limits on the vector-like lepton cross section, for heavy vector-like leptons coupling exclusively to electrons.

95\% CL upper limits on the vector-like lepton cross section, for heavy vector-like leptons coupling exclusively to muons.

95% CL upper limits on the type-III seesaw production cross section, for the seesaw leptons coupling exclusively to electrons.

95% CL upper limits on the type-III seesaw production cross section, for the seesaw leptons coupling exclusively to muons.

95% CL upper limits on $\sigma_{\mathrm{vis}}$ for the $Z+e$ flavour channel, derived without dividing events into the three categories.

95% CL upper limits on $\sigma_{\mathrm{vis}}$ for the $Z+\mu$ flavour channel, derived without dividing events into the three categories.

95% CL upper limits on $\sigma_{\mathrm{vis}}$ for the $Z+e$ flavour channel, for events in the four lepton signal region.:.

95% CL upper limits on $\sigma_{\mathrm{vis}}$ for the $Z+\mu$ flavour channel, for events in the four lepton signal region.

95% CL upper limits on $\sigma_{\mathrm{vis}}$ for the $Z+e$ flavour channel, for events in the two-jet signal region.

95% CL upper limits on $\sigma_{\mathrm{vis}}$ for the $Z+\mu$ flavour channel, for events in the two-jet signal region.

Efficiencies for reconstructing and correctly identifying the $L^{\pm}\rightarrow Z(\ell\ell)e^{\pm}$ decay in the inclusive category and $Z+e$ flavor channel, for events within the fiducial volume for the type-III seesaw model. One heavy lepton is required to decay to $Z+e$, with the $Z$ boson decaying leptonically. The efficiencies are shown separately for each decay mode of the second heavy lepton.

Efficiencies for reconstructing and correctly identifying the $L^{\pm}\rightarrow Z(\ell\ell)\mu^{\pm}$ decay in the inclusive category and $Z+\mu$ flavor channel, for events within the fiducial volume for the type-III seesaw model. One heavy lepton is required to decay to $Z+\mu$, with the $Z$ boson decaying leptonically. The efficiencies are shown separately for each decay mode of the second heavy lepton.

Efficiencies for reconstructing and correctly identifying the $L^{\pm}\rightarrow Z(\ell\ell)e^{\pm}$ decay in the $4\ell$ category and $Z+e$ flavor channel, for events within the fiducial volume for the type-III seesaw model. One heavy lepton is required to decay to $Z+e$, with the $Z$ boson decaying leptonically. The efficiencies are shown separately for each decay mode of the second heavy lepton.

Efficiencies for reconstructing and correctly identifying the $L^{\pm}\rightarrow Z(\ell\ell)\mu^{\pm}$ decay in the $4\ell$ category and $Z+\mu$ flavor channel, for events within the fiducial volume for the type-III seesaw model. One heavy lepton is required to decay to $Z+\mu$, with the $Z$ boson decaying leptonically. The efficiencies are shown separately for each decay mode of the second heavy lepton.

Efficiencies for reconstructing and correctly identifying the $L^{\pm}\rightarrow Z(\ell\ell)e^{\pm}$ decay in the $3\ell+jj$ category and $Z+e$ flavor channel, for events within the fiducial volume for the type-III seesaw model. One heavy lepton is required to decay to $Z+e$, with the $Z$ boson decaying leptonically. The efficiencies are shown separately for each decay mode of the second heavy lepton.

Efficiencies for reconstructing and correctly identifying the $L^{\pm}\rightarrow Z(\ell\ell)\mu^{\pm}$ decay in the $3\ell+jj$ category and $Z+\mu$ flavor channel, for events within the fiducial volume for the type-III seesaw model. One heavy lepton is required to decay to $Z+\mu$, with the $Z$ boson decaying leptonically. The efficiencies are shown separately for each decay mode of the second heavy lepton.

Efficiencies for reconstructing and correctly identifying the $L^{\pm}\rightarrow Z(\ell\ell)e^{\pm}$ decay in the $3\ell$-only category and $Z+e$ flavor channel, for events within the fiducial volume for the type-III seesaw model. One heavy lepton is required to decay to $Z+e$, with the $Z$ boson decaying leptonically. The efficiencies are shown separately for each decay mode of the second heavy lepton.

Efficiencies for reconstructing and correctly identifying the $L^{\pm}\rightarrow Z(\ell\ell)\mu^{\pm}$ decay in the $3\ell$-only category and $Z+\mu$ flavor channel, for events within the fiducial volume for the type-III seesaw model. One heavy lepton is required to decay to $Z+\mu$, with the $Z$ boson decaying leptonically. The efficiencies are shown separately for each decay mode of the second heavy lepton.