Expected and observed upper limits at the 95% CL on the BB cross section as a function of B quark mass under the assumption of BR(B->Wt)=1.

Expected and observed upper limits at the 95% CL on the BB cross section as a function of B quark mass for an SU(2) singlet B.

Expected and observed 95% CL lower limits on the mass of the T quark in the branching ratio plane of BR(T->Wb) versus BR(T->Ht).

Expected and observed 95% CL lower limits on the mass of the B quark in the branching ratio plane of BR(T->Wb) versus BR(T->Ht).

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

The statistical error per bin of Dalitz plot, for 3-hadron chains with mass below 0.59 GeV. Coordinates X = sqrt(3)(T0-T2)/sum(T) , Y = 3T1/sum(T) - 1. T0/T1/T2 stand for kinetic energy of hadrons in the rest frame of the triplet ( hadrons 0 and 2 form like-sign pair).

The bin-uncorrelated systematic error per bin of Dalitz plot, for 3-hadron chains with mass below 0.59 GeV. Coordinates X = sqrt(3)(T0-T2)/sum(T) , Y = 3T1/sum(T) - 1. T0/T1/T2 stand for kinetic energy of hadrons in the rest frame of the triplet ( hadrons 0 and 2 form like-sign pair).

The bin-correlated systematic error per bin of Dalitz plot, for 3-hadron chains with mass below 0.59 GeV. Coordinates X = sqrt(3)(T0-T2)/sum(T) , Y = 3T1/sum(T) - 1. T0/T1/T2 stand for kinetic energy of hadrons in the rest frame of the triplet ( hadrons 0 and 2 form like-sign pair).

DM exclusion limit in the two-dimensional phase space of WIMP mass m_χ vs mediator mass m_med determined using the combined ee+μμ channel. Both the observed and expected limits are presented, and the 1σ uncertainty band for the expected limits is also provided. Regions bounded by the limit curves are excluded at the 95% CL. The grey line labelled with "m_med = 2m_χ'' indicates the kinematic threshold where the mediator can decay on-shell into WIMPs, and the other grey line gives the perturbative limit (arXiv 1603.04156). The relic density line (arXiv 1603.04156) illustrates the combination of m_χ and m_med that would explain the observed DM relic density.

DM exclusion limit in the two-dimensional phase space of WIMP mass m_χ vs mediator mass m_med determined using the combined ee+μμ channel. Both the observed and expected limits are presented, and the 1σ uncertainty band for the expected limits is also provided. Regions bounded by the limit curves are excluded at the 95% CL. The grey line labelled with "m_med = 2m_χ'' indicates the kinematic threshold where the mediator can decay on-shell into WIMPs, and the other grey line gives the perturbative limit (arXiv 1603.04156). The relic density line (arXiv 1603.04156) illustrates the combination of m_χ and m_med that would explain the observed DM relic density.

DM exclusion limit in the two-dimensional phase space of WIMP mass m_χ vs mediator mass m_med determined using the combined ee+μμ channel. Both the observed and expected limits are presented, and the 1σ uncertainty band for the expected limits is also provided. Regions bounded by the limit curves are excluded at the 95% CL. The grey line labelled with "m_med = 2m_χ'' indicates the kinematic threshold where the mediator can decay on-shell into WIMPs, and the other grey line gives the perturbative limit (arXiv 1603.04156). The relic density line (arXiv 1603.04156) illustrates the combination of m_χ and m_med that would explain the observed DM relic density.

The 95% CL upper limits on the production cross-section of the ZH process with the prompt Z→ ee and Z→ μμ decays and the invisible Higgs boson decays as a function of m_H, obtained from the combined ee+μμ channel. The observed and expected limits are given, as well as the ±1σ and ±2σ error bands on the expected limits. The signal process is only modelled for the qq initial state, and the theory uncertainties on the signal prediction are not considered.

DM exclusion limit in the two-dimensional phase space of m_χ vs m_med set using the combined ee+μμ channel. The DM model assumes a vector mediator, a fermionic WIMP, and the coupling parameters g_q = 0.25 and g_χ = 1. Both the observed and expected limits are presented, and the 1σ uncertainty band for the expected limits is also provided. Regions bounded by the limit curves are excluded at the 95% CL. The grey line labelled with "m_med = 2m_χ'' indicates the kinematic threshold where the mediator can decay on-shell into WIMPs. The relic density line [arXiv 1603.04156] illustrates the combination of m_χ and m_med that would explain the observed DM relic density.

DM exclusion limit in the two-dimensional phase space of m_χ vs m_med set using the combined ee+μμ channel. The DM model assumes a vector mediator, a fermionic WIMP, and the coupling parameters g_q = 0.25 and g_χ = 1. Both the observed and expected limits are presented, and the 1σ uncertainty band for the expected limits is also provided. Regions bounded by the limit curves are excluded at the 95% CL. The grey line labelled with "m_med = 2m_χ'' indicates the kinematic threshold where the mediator can decay on-shell into WIMPs. The relic density line [arXiv 1603.04156] illustrates the combination of m_χ and m_med that would explain the observed DM relic density.

DM exclusion limit in the two-dimensional phase space of m_χ vs m_med set using the combined ee+μμ channel. The DM model assumes a vector mediator, a fermionic WIMP, and the coupling parameters g_q = 0.25 and g_χ = 1. Both the observed and expected limits are presented, and the 1σ uncertainty band for the expected limits is also provided. Regions bounded by the limit curves are excluded at the 95% CL. The grey line labelled with "m_med = 2m_χ'' indicates the kinematic threshold where the mediator can decay on-shell into WIMPs. The relic density line [arXiv 1603.04156] illustrates the combination of m_χ and m_med that would explain the observed DM relic density.

DM exclusion limit in the two-dimensional phase space of m_χ vs m_med set using the combined ee+μμ channel. The DM model assumes a vector mediator, a fermionic WIMP, and the coupling parameters g_q = 0.25 and g_χ = 1. Both the observed and expected limits are presented, and the 1σ uncertainty band for the expected limits is also provided. Regions bounded by the limit curves are excluded at the 95% CL. The grey line labelled with "m_med = 2m_χ'' indicates the kinematic threshold where the mediator can decay on-shell into WIMPs. The relic density line [arXiv 1603.04156] illustrates the combination of m_χ and m_med that would explain the observed DM relic density.

Limits on the WIMP and proton scattering cross section as a function of WIMP mass, obtained for simplified dark matter models with an axial-vector mediator (left) and a vector mediator (right). The solid black line shows the observed limit at the 90% confidence level from this search. The left plot incorporates the latest results from these competitive direct-search experiments, LUX [arXiv 1705.03380], PICO-2L [Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 231302], and PICO-60 [arXiv 1702.07666]. The right plot incorporates the latest results from the following experiments, CRESST-II [Eur. Phys. J. C76 (2016) 25], CDMSlite [Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 071301], PandaX-II [Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2016) 121303], LUX [Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 (2017) 021303], and XENON1T [arXiv 1705.06655].

Limits on the WIMP and proton scattering cross section as a function of WIMP mass, obtained for simplified dark matter models with an axial-vector mediator (left) and a vector mediator (right). The solid black line shows the observed limit at the 90% confidence level from this search. The left plot incorporates the latest results from these competitive direct-search experiments, LUX [arXiv 1705.03380], PICO-2L [Phys. Rev. Lett. 114 (2015) 231302], and PICO-60 [arXiv 1702.07666]. The right plot incorporates the latest results from the following experiments, CRESST-II [Eur. Phys. J. C76 (2016) 25], CDMSlite [Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 071301], PandaX-II [Phys. Rev. Lett. 117 (2016) 121303], LUX [Phys. Rev. Lett. 118 (2017) 021303], and XENON1T [arXiv 1705.06655].

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Two-body selection distribution of $R_{2\ell 2j}$ in $CR^{2-body}_{VV-SF}$ after the background fits. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Two-body selection distribution of $E_{T,corr}^{miss}$ in $CR_{ttZ}$ after the background fits. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Two-body selection distribution of $E_{T,corr}^{miss}$ in $CR_{VZ}$ after the background fits. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Three-body selection background fit results for the CRs of the SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ and SR$^{3-body}_{t}$ background fit. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds (ttbar, $VV$-DF and $VV$-SF) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs.Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Entries marked ``--'' indicate a negligible background contribution. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty extends to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Three-body selection distributions of $R_{p_{T}}$ in $CR^{3-body}_{t\bar{t}}$ after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Three-body selection distributions of $cos\theta_{b}$ in $CR^{3-body}_{VV-DF}$ after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Three-body selection distributions of $M_{\Delta}^{R}$ in $CR^{3-body}_{VV-SF}$ after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Four-body selection background fit results for the CRs of the SR$^{4-body}$ background fit. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds ($t\bar t$, $VV$ and $Z_{\tau\tau}$) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty extends to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Four-body selection distributions of the $p_{T}(j_1)$ in CR$^{4-body}_{t\bar{t}}$ after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Four-body selection distributions of the $R_{2\ell}$ in CR$^{4-body}_{VV}$ after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Four-body selection distributions of the $E^{miss}_{T}$ in CR$^{4-body}_{Z\tau\tau}$ after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and detector-related systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Two-body selection background fit results for SRA$^{2-body}_{180}$ and SRB$^{2-body}_{140}$. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds ($t\bar t$, $t\bar t Z$) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs. The Others category contains the contributions from $t\bar t W$, $t\bar t h$, $t\bar t WW$, $t\bar t t$, $t\bar t t\bar t$, $Wh$, $ggh$ and $Zh$ production. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Entries marked $--$ indicate a negligible background contribution. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty extends to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Two-body selection background fit results for SRC$^{2-body}_{110}$. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds ($t\bar t$, $t\bar t Z$) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs. The Others category contains the contributions from $t\bar t W$, $t\bar t h$, $t\bar t WW$, $t\bar t t$, $t\bar t t\bar t$, $Wh$, $ggh$ and $Zh$ production. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Entries marked $--$ indicate a negligible background contribution. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty extends to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Two-body selection distributions of $m_{T2}^{ll}$ for events satisfying the selection criteria of the six SRs, except for the one on $m_{T2}^{ll}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Two-body selection distributions of $m_{T2}^{ll}$ for events satisfying the selection criteria of the six SRs, except for the one on $m_{T2}^{ll}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Two-body selection distributions of $m_{T2}^{ll}$ for events satisfying the selection criteria of the six SRs, except for the one on $m_{T2}^{ll}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Two-body selection distributions of $m_{T2}^{ll}$ for events satisfying the selection criteria of the six SRs, except for the one on $m_{T2}^{ll}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Two-body selection distributions of $m_{T2}^{ll}$ for events satisfying the selection criteria of the six SRs, except for the one on $m_{T2}^{ll}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Two-body selection distributions of $m_{T2}^{ll}$ for events satisfying the selection criteria of the six SRs, except for the one on $m_{T2}^{ll}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Two-body selection background fit results for SR(A,B)$^{2-body}_{x,y}$ regions, where x and y denote the low and high edges of the bin. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric.

Three-body selection background fit results for SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ and SR$^{3-body}_{t}$. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric.

Three-body selection distributions of $R_{p_{T}}$ in same-flavour events that satisfy all the SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ selection criteria except for the one on $R_{p_{T}}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Three-body selection distributions of $R_{p_{T}}$ in different-flavour events that satisfy all the SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ selection criteria except for the one on $R_{p_{T}}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Three-body selection distributions of $M_{\Delta}^{R}$ in same-flavour events that satisfy all the SR$^{3-body}_{t}$ selection criteria except for the one on $M_{\Delta}^{R}$, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Three-body selection distributions of $M_{\Delta}^{R}$ in different-flavour events that satisfy all the SR$^{3-body}_{t}$ selection criteria except for the one on $M_{\Delta}^{R}$ after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Four-body selection distributions of $R_{2\ell 4j}$ for events satisfying all the SR$^{4-body}$ selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Four-body selection distributions of $R_{2\ell}$ for events satisfying all the SR$^{4-body}$ selections but for the one on the variable shown in the figure, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. Reference top squark pair production signal models are overlayed for comparison. Red arrows indicate the signal region selection criteria.

Four-body selection background fit results for SR$^{4-body}$. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds ($t \bar t$, $VV$ and $Z_{\tau\tau}$) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs. The Others category contains the contributions from $t\bar t W$, $t\bar t h$, $t\bar t WW$, $t\bar t $, $t\bar t t\bar t$ , $Wh$, $ggh$ and $Zh$ production. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty extends to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Model-independent 95% CL upper limits on the visible cross-section ($\sigma_{vis}$) of new physics, the visible number of signal events ($S^{95}_{\rm obs}$), the visible number of signal events ($S^{95}_{\rm exp}$) given the expected number of background events (and $\pm1\sigma$ excursions on the expectation), and the discovery $p$-value ($p(s = 0)$), all calculated with pseudo-experiments, are shown for each SR.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for a simplified model assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL for a simplified model assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL from the analysis of $36.1 \; \text{fb}^{-1}$ of 13 TeV $pp$ collision data as a function of the mass of the $\tilde{t}_1$ for a fixed $(\tilde{\chi}^0_1) = 0$ GeV, assuming $\text{BR}(\tilde{\chi}^0_2 \to Z\tilde{\chi}^0_1) = 0.5$ and $\text{BR}(\tilde{\chi}^0_2 \to h\tilde{\chi}^0_1) = 0.5$.

Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL from the analysis of $36.1 \; \text{fb}^{-1}$ of 13 TeV $pp$ collision data as a function of the mass of the $\tilde{t}_1$ for a fixed $(\tilde{\chi}^0_1) = 0$ GeV, assuming $\text{BR}(\tilde{\chi}^0_2 \to Z\tilde{\chi}^0_1) = 0.5$ and $\text{BR}(\tilde{\chi}^0_2 \to h\tilde{\chi}^0_1) = 0.5$.

Expected exclusion contour as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}_1}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1}$ in the pMSSM model described in the text. Pair production of $\tilde{t}_1$ and $\tilde{b}_1$ are considered. Limits are set for both the positive (red in the figure) and negative (blue in the figure) values of $\mu$. The dashed and dotted grey lines indicate constant values of the $\tilde{b}_1$ mass. The signal models included within the shown contours are excluded at 95% CL. The dashed lines and the shaded band are the expected limit and its $\pm1\sigma$ uncertainty. The thick solid line is the observed limit for the central value of the signal cross-section. The expected and observed limits do not include the effect of the theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

Observed exclusion contour as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}_1}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1}$ in the pMSSM model described in the text. Pair production of $\tilde{t}_1$ and $\tilde{b}_1$ are considered. Limits are set for both the positive (red in the figure) and negative (blue in the figure) values of $\mu$. The dashed and dotted grey lines indicate constant values of the $\tilde{b}_1$ mass. The signal models included within the shown contours are excluded at 95% CL. The dashed lines and the shaded band are the expected limit and its $\pm1\sigma$ uncertainty. The thick solid line is the observed limit for the central value of the signal cross-section. The expected and observed limits do not include the effect of the theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

Expected exclusion contour as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}_1}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1}$ in the pMSSM model described in the text. Pair production of $\tilde{t}_1$ and $\tilde{b}_1$ are considered. Limits are set for both the positive (red in the figure) and negative (blue in the figure) values of $\mu$. The dashed and dotted grey lines indicate constant values of the $\tilde{b}_1$ mass. The signal models included within the shown contours are excluded at 95% CL. The dashed lines and the shaded band are the expected limit and its $\pm1\sigma$ uncertainty. The thick solid line is the observed limit for the central value of the signal cross-section. The expected and observed limits do not include the effect of the theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

Observed exclusion contour as a function of $m_{\tilde{t}_1}$ and $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1}$ in the pMSSM model described in the text. Pair production of $\tilde{t}_1$ and $\tilde{b}_1$ are considered. Limits are set for both the positive (red in the figure) and negative (blue in the figure) values of $\mu$. The dashed and dotted grey lines indicate constant values of the $\tilde{b}_1$ mass. The signal models included within the shown contours are excluded at 95% CL. The dashed lines and the shaded band are the expected limit and its $\pm1\sigma$ uncertainty. The thick solid line is the observed limit for the central value of the signal cross-section. The expected and observed limits do not include the effect of the theoretical uncertainties in the signal cross-section.

Illustration of the best expected signal region per signal grid point for the simplified model assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

Two-body selection background fit results for the VR in the SRA$^{2-body}$ and SRB$^{2-body}_{140}$ background-only fit. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds ($t\bar t$, $t\bar t Z$) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs. The Others category contains the contributions from $t\bar t W$, $t\bar t h$, $t\bar t WW$, $t\bar t t$, $t\bar t t\bar t$, $Wh$, $ggh$ and $Zh$ production. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty reaches down to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Two-body selection background fit results for the VR in the SRC$^{2-body}_{110}$ background-only fit. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds ($t\bar t$, $t\bar t Z$) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs. The Others category contains the contributions from $t\bar t W$, $t\bar t h$, $t\bar t WW$, $t\bar t t$, $t\bar t t\bar t$, $Wh$, $ggh$ and $Zh$ production. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty reaches down to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Three-body selection background fit results for the VRs in the SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ and SR$^{3-body}_{t}$ background-only fits. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds ($t\bar t$, $VV$ and $Z_{\tau\tau}$) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs. The Others category contains the contributions from $t\bar t W$, $t\bar t h$, $t\bar t WW$, $t\bar t $, $t\bar t t\bar t$ , $Wh$, $ggh$ and $Zh$ production. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty reaches down to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Four-body selection background fit results for the VRs in the SR$^{4-body}$ background-only fit. The nominal expectations from MC simulation are given for comparison for those backgrounds ($t\bar t$, $VV$ and $Z_{\tau\tau}$) that are normalised to data in dedicated CRs. The Others category contains the contributions from $t\bar t W$, $t\bar t h$, $t\bar t WW$, $t\bar t $, $t\bar t t\bar t$ , $Wh$, $ggh$ and $Zh$ production. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are given. Uncertainties on the predicted background event yields are quoted as symmetric except where the negative uncertainty reaches down to zero predicted events, in which case the negative uncertainty is truncated.

Two-body selection distribution of $E_{T}^{miss}$ for events satisfying all the VR$^{2-body}_{VV-DF}$ selections, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Two-body selection distribution of $m_{T2}^{ll}$ for events satisfying all the VR$^{2-body}_{t\bar{t}}$ selections, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Two-body selection distribution of $m_{T2}^{ll}$ for events satisfying all the VR$^{2-body}_{t\bar{t},3j}$ selections, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Three-body selection distributions of $M_{\Delta}^{R}$ in events that satisfy all the $VR^{3-body}_{t\bar{t}}$ selection criteria after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Three-body selection distributions of $R_{p_{T}}$ in events that satisfy all the $VR^{3-body}_{VV-SF}$ selection criteria after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Three-body selection distributions of $R_{p_{T}}$ in events that satisfy all the $VR^{3-body}_{VV-DF}$ selection criteria after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the hatched bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Four-body selection distributions of $R_{2\ell 4j}$ for events with at least 2 jets (with the two leading required not be identified as $b$-jets), a leading jet $p_{T} >150$ GeV and satisfying the SR$^{4-body}$ requirements on the leptons. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The fake and non-prompt lepton backgrounds are estimated from data, the other backgrounds are estimated from MC simulation with a background fit as described in Section6. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. In order to enhance the contribution from fake or non-prompt leptons, the lepton pair is required to have the same charge.

Four-body selection distributions of $R_{2\ell}$ for events with at least 2 jets (with the two leading required not be identified as $b$-jets), a leading jet $p_{T} >150$ GeV and satisfying the SR$^{4-body}$ requirements on the leptons. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The fake and non-prompt lepton backgrounds are estimated from data, the other backgrounds are estimated from MC simulation with a background fit as described in Section6. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events. In order to enhance the contribution from fake or non-prompt leptons, the lepton pair is required to have the same charge.

Four-body selection distributions of $E^{miss}_{T}$ for events satisfying all the VR$^{4-body}_{t\bar{t}}$ selections, after the background fit. The contributions from all SM backgrounds are shown as a histogram stack; the bands represent the total statistical and systematic uncertainty. The fake and non-prompt lepton backgrounds are estimated from data, the other backgrounds are estimated from MC simulation with a background fit as described in Section 6}. The rightmost bin of each plot includes overflow events.

Number of signal events selected at different stages for some scenarios in the $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ model.

Number of signal events selected at different stages for some scenarios in the $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ model.

Number of signal events selected at different stages for some scenarios in the $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b W \tilde{\chi}^{0}_1$ model.

Number of signal events selected at different stages for some scenarios in the $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b f f \prime \tilde{\chi}^0_1$ model.

Upper limits on cross-sections (in fb) at 95% CL for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t^{}(*)\tilde{\chi}^{0}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

Upper limits on cross-sections (in fb) at 95% CL for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio. The lightest chargino mass is assumed to be close to the stop mass, $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1} = m_{\tilde{t}_1}-10$ GeV.

Upper limits on cross-sections (in fb) at 95% CL for each signal model, assuming the pMSSM model described in the text. Pair production of $\tilde{t}_{1}$ and $\tilde{b}_{1}$ are considered. Limits are set for both positive (top) and negative (bottom) values of $\mu$.

Upper limits on cross-sections (in fb) at 95% CL for each signal model, assuming the pMSSM model described in the text. Pair production of $\tilde{t}_{1}$ and $\tilde{b}_{1}$ are considered. Limits are set for both positive (top) and negative (bottom) values of $\mu$.

SRA$^{2-body}_{120,140}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{120,140}$ Same Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{140,160}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{140,160}$ Same Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{160,180}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{160,180}$ Same Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{180}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{180}$ Same Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRB$^{2-body}_{120,140}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRB$^{2-body}_{120,140}$ SF acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRB$^{2-body}_{140}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRB$^{2-body}_{140}$ SF acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRC$^{2-body}_{110}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRC$^{2-body}_{110}$ SF acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ SF acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{3-body}_{t}$ Different Flavour acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{3-body}_{t}$ SF acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{4-body}$ acceptance for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b f f \prime \tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{120,140}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{120,140}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{140,160}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{140,160}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{160,180}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{160,180}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{180}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRA$^{2-body}_{180}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRB$^{2-body}_{120,140}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRB$^{2-body}_{120,140}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRB$^{2-body}_{140}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRB$^{2-body}_{140}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRC$^{2-body}_{110}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SRC$^{2-body}_{110}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow t\tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{3-body}_{W}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{3-body}_{t}$ Different Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{3-body}_{t}$ Same Flavour efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_{1}$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_{1}\rightarrow t+\tilde{\chi}_{1}^{0}$ with 100% branching ratio.

SR$^{4-body}$ efficiency for each signal model, assuming $\tilde{t}_1$ pair production, decaying via $\tilde{t}_1 \rightarrow b f f \prime \tilde{\chi}^0_1$ with 100% branching ratio.

Observed and expected confidence intervals at 95\% CL on the different anomalous quartic gauge couplings for the combined $WV\gamma$ analysis and the form factor scale $\Lambda_{\text{FF}} = \infty$.

Observed and expected confidence intervals at 95\% CL on the different anomalous quartic gauge couplings for the combined $WV\gamma$ analysis and the form factor scale $\Lambda_{\text{FF}} = 1.0$ TeV.

Observed and expected confidence intervals at 95\% CL on the different anomalous quartic gauge couplings for the combined $WV\gamma$ analysis and the form factor scale $\Lambda_{\text{FF}} = 0.5$ TeV.

Numbers of observed events and predicted background events for the different final states in the nominal phase space. Also given are the correction factors $\epsilon$ to correct from reconstruction level to particle level and $C^{\text{p2p}}$ to correct from parton level to particle level.

Numbers of observed events and predicted background events for the different final states with the respective photon \et threshold optimised for maximal aQGC sensitivity. Also given are the correction factors $\epsilon$ to correct from reconstruction level to particle level and $C^{\text{p2p}}$ to correct from parton level to particle level.

Differential cross sections in the full phase space obtained from the H->gammagamma and H->4l combined measurement for the transverse momentum of the leading jet pTj1. The first bin in the pTj1 distribution corresponds to the 0-jet bin in the Njets distribution. The NNLOPS ggF prediction scaled to the N3LO cross section is also provided.

Acceptance factors to extrapolate from the fiducial phase space to the total phase space, in bins of Higgs transverse momentum, in the 4l channel.

Acceptance factors to extrapolate from the fiducial phase space to the total phase space, in bins of Higgs transverse momentum, in the gamma gamma channel.

Acceptance factors to extrapolate from the fiducial phase space to the total phase space, in bins of Higgs rapidity, in the 4l channel.

Acceptance factors to extrapolate from the fiducial phase space to the total phase space, in bins of Higgs rapidity, in the gamma gamma channel.

Acceptance factors to extrapolate from the fiducial phase space to the total phase space, in bins of number of jets, in the 4l channel.

Acceptance factors to extrapolate from the fiducial phase space to the total phase space, in bins of number of jets, in the gamma gamma channel.

Acceptance factors to extrapolate from the fiducial phase space to the total phase space, in bins of the transverse momentum of the leading jet, in the 4l channel.

Acceptance factors to extrapolate from the fiducial phase space to the total phase space, in bins of the transverse momentum of the leading jet, in the gamma gamma channel.