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.

Missing transverse momentum distribution after SR3b selection, beside the $E_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{miss}$ requirement. The results in the signal region correspond to the last inclusive bin. The systematic uncertainties include theory uncertainties for the backgrounds with prompt SS/3L and the full systematic uncertainties for data-driven backgrounds. For illustration the distribution for a benchmark SUSY scenario ($pp\to \tilde g\tilde g$, $\tilde g\to t\bar t\tilde\chi_1^0$, $m_{\tilde g}=1.2$ TeV, $m_{\tilde\chi_1^0}=0.7$ TeV) is also shown.

Observed exclusion limits on the $\tilde g$ and $\tilde\chi_1^0$ masses in the context of SUSY scenarios with simplified mass spectra featuring $\tilde g\tilde g$ pair production with exclusive $\tilde g\to qq(\tilde\ell\ell/\tilde\nu\nu)$ decays. All limits are computed at 95% CL.

Expected exclusion limits on the $\tilde g$ and $\tilde\chi_1^0$ masses in the context of SUSY scenarios with simplified mass spectra featuring $\tilde g\tilde g$ pair production with exclusive $\tilde g\to qq(\tilde\ell\ell/\tilde\nu\nu)$ decays. All limits are computed at 95% CL.

Upper limits on signal cross-sections as function of the $\tilde g$ and $\tilde\chi_1^0$ masses in the context of SUSY scenarios with simplified mass spectra featuring $\tilde g\tilde g$ pair production with exclusive $\tilde g\to qq(\tilde\ell\ell/\tilde\nu\nu)$ decays, obtained using the signal efficiency and acceptance specific to each model. All limits are computed at 95% CL.

Observed exclusion limits on the $\tilde g$ and $\tilde\chi_1^0$ masses in the context of SUSY scenarios with simplified mass spectra featuring $\tilde g\tilde g$ pair production with exclusive $\tilde g\to qqWZ\tilde\chi_1^0$ decays. All limits are computed at 95% CL.

Expected exclusion limits on the $\tilde g$ and $\tilde\chi_1^0$ masses in the context of SUSY scenarios with simplified mass spectra featuring $\tilde g\tilde g$ pair production with exclusive $\tilde g\to qqWZ\tilde\chi_1^0$ decays. All limits are computed at 95% CL.

Upper limits on signal cross-sections as function of the $\tilde g$ and $\tilde\chi_1^0$ masses in the context of SUSY scenarios with simplified mass spectra featuring $\tilde g\tilde g$ pair production with exclusive $\tilde g\to qqWZ\tilde\chi_1^0$ decays, obtained using the signal efficiency and acceptance specific to each model. All limits are computed at 95% CL.

Observed exclusion limits on the $\tilde b_1$ and $\tilde\chi_1^0$ masses in the context of SUSY scenarios with simplified mass spectra featuring $\tilde b_1\tilde b_1^*$ pair production with exclusive $\tilde b_1\to t\tilde\chi_1^-$ decays. All limits are computed at 95% CL.

Expected exclusion limits on the $\tilde b_1$ and $\tilde\chi_1^0$ masses in the context of SUSY scenarios with simplified mass spectra featuring $\tilde b_1\tilde b_1^*$ pair production with exclusive $\tilde b_1\to t\tilde\chi_1^-$ decays. All limits are computed at 95% CL.

Upper limits on signal cross-sections as function of the $\tilde b_1$ and $\tilde\chi_1^0$ masses in the context of SUSY scenarios with simplified mass spectra featuring $\tilde b_1\tilde b_1^*$ pair production with exclusive $\tilde b_1\to t\tilde\chi_1^-$ decays, obtained using the signal efficiency and acceptance specific to each model. All limits are computed at 95% CL.

Observed exclusion limits on the $\tilde g$ and $\tilde\chi_1^0$ masses in the context of SUSY scenarios with simplified mass spectra featuring $\tilde g\tilde g$ pair production with exclusive $\tilde g\to t\bar t\tilde\chi_1^0$ decays. All limits are computed at 95% CL.

Expected exclusion limits on the $\tilde g$ and $\tilde\chi_1^0$ masses in the context of SUSY scenarios with simplified mass spectra featuring $\tilde g\tilde g$ pair production with exclusive $\tilde g\to t\bar t\tilde\chi_1^0$ decays. All limits are computed at 95% CL.

Upper limits on signal cross-sections as function of the $\tilde g$ and $\tilde\chi_1^0$ masses in the context of SUSY scenarios with simplified mass spectra featuring $\tilde g\tilde g$ pair production with exclusive $\tilde g\to t\bar t\tilde\chi_1^0$ decays, obtained using the signal efficiency and acceptance specific to each model. All limits are computed at 95% CL.

SUSY scenario with $\tilde g\tilde g$ production and $\tilde g\to q\bar q(\tilde\ell\ell/\tilde\nu\nu)$ decay: signal acceptance (in %) in the signal region SR0b3j. The benchmark scenarios used to set exclusion limits are materialized by black dot markers. Acceptance and efficiency are defined as in appendix A of [JHEP 06 (2014) 124, arXiv: 1403.4853v1 [hep-ex]].

SUSY scenario with $\tilde g\tilde g$ production and $\tilde g\to q\bar q(\tilde\ell\ell/\tilde\nu\nu)$ decay: reconstruction efficiency (in %) in the signal region SR0b3j. The benchmark scenarios used to set exclusion limits are materialized by black dot markers. Acceptance and efficiency are defined as in appendix A of [JHEP 06 (2014) 124, arXiv: 1403.4853v1 [hep-ex]].

SUSY scenario with $\tilde g\tilde g$ production and $\tilde g\to q\bar qWZ\tilde\chi_1^0$ decay: signal acceptance (in %) in the signal region SR0b5j. The benchmark scenarios used to set exclusion limits are materialized by black dot markers. Acceptance and efficiency are defined as in appendix A of [JHEP 06 (2014) 124, arXiv: 1403.4853v1 [hep-ex]].

SUSY scenario with $\tilde g\tilde g$ production and $\tilde g\to q\bar qWZ\tilde\chi_1^0$ decay: reconstruction efficiency (in %) in the signal region SR0b5j. The benchmark scenarios used to set exclusion limits are materialized by black dot markers. Acceptance and efficiency are defined as in appendix A of [JHEP 06 (2014) 124, arXiv: 1403.4853v1 [hep-ex]].

SUSY scenario with $\tilde b_1\tilde b_1^*$ production and $\tilde b_1\to tW\tilde\chi_1^0$ decay: signal acceptance (in %) in the signal region SR1b. The benchmark scenarios used to set exclusion limits are materialized by black dot markers. Acceptance and efficiency are defined as in appendix A of [JHEP 06 (2014) 124, arXiv: 1403.4853v1 [hep-ex]].

SUSY scenario with $\tilde b_1\tilde b_1^*$ production and $\tilde b_1\to tW\tilde\chi_1^0$ decay: reconstruction efficiency (in %) in the signal region SR1b. The benchmark scenarios used to set exclusion limits are materialized by black dot markers. Acceptance and efficiency are defined as in appendix A of [JHEP 06 (2014) 124, arXiv: 1403.4853v1 [hep-ex]].

SUSY scenario with $\tilde g\tilde g$ production and $\tilde g\to t\bar t\tilde\chi_1^0$ decay: signal acceptance (in %) in the signal region SR3b. The benchmark scenarios used to set exclusion limits are materialized by black dot markers. Acceptance and efficiency are defined as in appendix A of [JHEP 06 (2014) 124, arXiv: 1403.4853v1 [hep-ex]].

SUSY scenario with $\tilde g\tilde g$ production and $\tilde g\to t\bar t\tilde\chi_1^0$ decay: reconstruction efficiency (in %) in the signal region SR3b. The benchmark scenarios used to set exclusion limits are materialized by black dot markers. Acceptance and efficiency are defined as in appendix A of [JHEP 06 (2014) 124, arXiv: 1403.4853v1 [hep-ex]].

Observed 95 PCT exclusion limit in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Expected 95 PCT exclusion limit in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Observed 95 PCT exclusion limit in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Number of MC signal events in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Number of MC signal events in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Number of MC signal events in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Cross section in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Cross section in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Cross section in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Acceptance in the 1LSR signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Acceptance in the 1LSR signal region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Efficiency in the 1LSR signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Efficiency in the 1LSR signal region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Total PCT systematic uncertainty in the 1LSR region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Total PCT systematic uncertainty in the 1LSR region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Acceptance in the 2LSR1 signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Acceptance in the 2LSR2 signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Efficiency in the 2LSR1 signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Efficiency in the 2LSR2 signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Total PCT systematic uncertainty in the 2LSR1 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Total PCT systematic uncertainty in the 2LSR2 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

Acceptance in the 2LSR1 signal region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Acceptance in the 2LSR2 signal region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Efficiency in the 2LSR1 signal region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Efficiency in the 2LSR2 signal region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Total PCT systematic uncertainty in the 2LSR1 region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Total PCT systematic uncertainty in the 2LSR2 region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

Acceptance in the 2LSR1 signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Acceptance in the 2LSR2 signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Efficiency in the 2LSR1 signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Efficiency in the 2LSR2 signal region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Total PCT systematic uncertainty in the 2LSR1 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Total PCT systematic uncertainty in the 2LSR2 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

expected CLs values for the 1LSR region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

observed CLs values for the 1LSR region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

expected CLs values for the 2LSR1 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

observed CLs values for the 2LSR1 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

expected CLs values for the 2LSR2 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

observed CLs values for the 2LSR2 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

expected CLs values combining the 1LSR and 2LSR1 regions in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

observed CLs values combining the 1LSR and 2LSR1 regions in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

expected CLs values combining the 1LSR and 2LSR2 regions in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

observed CLs values combining the 1LSR and 2LSR2 regions in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

expected CLs values for the best expected combination in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

observed CLs values for the best expected combination in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in gaugino universality scenario.

expected CLs values for the 1LSR region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

observed CLs values for the 1LSR region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

expected CLs values for the 2LSR1 region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

observed CLs values for the 2LSR1 region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

expected CLs values for the 2LSR2 region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

observed CLs values for the 2LSR2 region in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

expected CLs values combining the 1LSR and 2LSR1 regions in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

observed CLs values combining the 1LSR and 2LSR1 regions in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

expected CLs values combining the 1LSR and 2LSR2 regions in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

observed CLs values combining the 1LSR and 2LSR2 regions in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

expected CLs values for the best expected combination in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

observed CLs values for the best expected combination in the M(chargino), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(stop) = 180 GEV.

expected CLs values for the 2LSR1 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

observed CLs values for the 2LSR1 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

expected CLs values for the 2LSR2 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

observed CLs values for the 2LSR2 region in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

expected CLs values for the best expected combination in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

observed CLs values for the best expected combination in the M(stop), M(neutralino) plane in the scenario where M(chargino) = 106 GEV.

Figure 2-a. Expected limit +1sigma.

Figure 2-a. Expected limit.

Figure 2-a. Expected limit -1sigma.

Figure 2-b. Observed limit +1sigma-th.

Figure 2-b. Observed limit.

Figure 2-b. Observed limit -1sigma-th.

Figure 2-b. Expected limit +1sigma.

Inclusive J/psi production cross-section as a function of J/psi pT in the J/psi rapidity (|y|) bin 1.5<|y|<2. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic and the third encapsulates any possible variation due to spin-alignment from the unpolarised central value.

Inclusive J/psi production cross-section as a function of J/psi pT in the J/psi rapidity (|y|) bin 0.75<|y|<1.5. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic and the third encapsulates any possible variation due to spin-alignment from the unpolarised central value.

Inclusive J/psi production cross-section as a function of J/psi pT in the J/psi rapidity (|y|) bin |y|<0.75. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic and the third encapsulates any possible variation due to spin-alignment from the unpolarised central value.

Non-prompt to inclusive production cross-section fraction fB as a function of J/psi pT for J/psi rapidity |y|<0.75 under the assumption that prompt and non-prompt J/psi production is unpolarised (lambda_theta = 0). The spin-alignment envelope spans the range of possible prompt cross-sections under various polarisation hypotheses, plus the range of non-prompt cross-sections within lambda_theta = +/- 0.1. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second uncertainty is systematic, the third number is the uncertainty due to spin-alignment.}.

Non-prompt to inclusive production cross-section fraction fB as a function of J/psi pT for J/psi rapidity 0.75<|y|<1.5 under the assumption that prompt and non-prompt J/psi production is unpolarised (lambda_theta = 0). The spin-alignment envelope spans the range of possible prompt cross-sections under various polarisation hypotheses, plus the range of non-prompt cross-sections within lambda_theta = +/-0.1. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second uncertainty is systematic, the third number is the uncertainty due to spin-alignment.

Non-prompt to inclusive production cross-section fraction fB as a function of J/psi pT for J/psi rapidity 1.5<|y|<2 under the assumption that prompt and non-prompt J/psi production is unpolarised (lambda_theta = 0). The spin-alignment envelope spans the range of possible prompt cross-sections under various polarisation hypotheses, plus the range of non-prompt cross-sections within lambda_theta = +/-0.1. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second uncertainty is systematic, the third number is the uncertainty due to spin-alignment.

Non-prompt to inclusive production cross-section fraction fB as a function of J/psi pT for J/psi rapidity 2<|y|<2.4 under the assumption that prompt and non-prompt J/psi production is unpolarised (lambda_theta = 0). The spin-alignment envelope spans the range of possible prompt cross-sections under various polarisation hypotheses, plus the range of non-prompt cross-sections within lambda_theta =+/-0.1. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second uncertainty is systematic, the third number is the uncertainty due to spin-alignment.

Non-prompt J/psi production cross-sections as a function of J/psi pT for J/psi rapidity |y|<0.75 under the assumption that prompt and non-prompt J/psi production is unpolarised (lambda_theta = 0), and the spin-alignment envelope spans the range of non-prompt cross-sections within lambda_theta = +/- 0.1. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second uncertainty is systematic. Comparison is made to FONLL predictions.

Non-prompt J/psi production cross-sections as a function of J/psi pT for J/psi rapidity 0.75<|y|<1.5 under the assumption that prompt and non-prompt J/psi production is unpolarised (lambda_theta = 0), and the spin-alignment envelope spans the range of non-prompt cross-sections within lambda_theta = +/- 0.1. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second uncertainty is systematic. Comparison is made to FONLL predictions.

Non-prompt J/psi production cross-sections as a function of J/psi pT for J/psi rapidity 1.5<|y|<2 under the assumption that prompt and non-prompt J/psi production is unpolarised (lambda_theta = 0), and the spin-alignment envelope spans the range of non-prompt cross-sections within lambda_theta = +/- 0.1. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second uncertainty is systematic. Comparison is made to FONLL predictions.

Non-prompt J/psi production cross-sections as a function of J/psi pT for J/psi rapidity 2<|y|<2.4 under the assumption that prompt and non-prompt J/psi production is unpolarised (lambda_theta = 0), and the spin-alignment envelope spans the range of non-prompt cross-sections within lambda_theta = +/- 0.1. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second uncertainty is systematic. Comparison is made to FONLL predictions.

Prompt J/psi production cross-sections as a function of J/psi pT for J/psi rapidity |y|<0.75. The central value assumes unpolarised (lambda_theta = 0) prompt and non-prompt production, and the spin-alignment envelope spans the range of possible prompt cross-sections under various polarisation hypotheses. The first quoted uncertainty is statistical, the second uncertainty is systematic. Comparison is made to the Colour Evaporation Model prediction.

Prompt J/psi production cross-sections as a function of J/psi pT for J/psi rapidity 0.75<|y|<1.5. The central value assumes unpolarised (lambda_theta = 0) prompt and non-prompt production, and the spin-alignment envelope spans the range of possible prompt cross-sections under various polarisation hypotheses. The first quoted uncertainty is statistical, the second uncertainty is systematic. Comparison is made to the Colour Evaporation Model prediction.

Prompt J/psi production cross-sections as a function of J/psi pT for J/psi rapidity 1.5<|y|<2. The central value assumes unpolarised (lambda_theta = 0) prompt and non-prompt production, and the spin-alignment envelope spans the range of possible prompt cross-sections under various polarisation hypotheses. The first quoted uncertainty is statistical, the second uncertainty is systematic. Comparison is made to the Colour Evaporation Model prediction.

Prompt J/psi production cross-sections as a function of J/psi pT for J/psi rapidity 2<|y|<2.4. The central value assumes unpolarised (lambda_theta = 0) prompt and non-prompt production, and the spin-alignment envelope spans the range of possible prompt cross-sections under various polarisation hypotheses. The first quoted uncertainty is statistical, the second uncertainty is systematic. Comparison is made to the Colour Evaporation Model prediction.

Unweighted J/psi candidate yields in bins of $J/psi transverse momentum and rapidity. Uncertainties are statistical only.

Summary table of all sources of considered systematic uncertainty and statistical uncertainty (as a percentage) on the corrected inclusive J/psi production cross-section, for absolute J/psi rapidities within 2<|y|<2.4. The sources of systematic error shown are, in order, Acceptance, Muon recognition, Trigger, Fitting and the Total systematics. Also shown in the last error is the possible envelope of variation the central result due to uncertainty on spin-alignment of the J\psi.

Summary table of all sources of considered systematic uncertainty and statistical uncertainty (as a percentage) on the corrected inclusive J/psi production cross-section, for absolute J/psi rapidities within 1.5<|y|<2. The sources of systematic error shown are, in order, Acceptance, Muon recognition, Trigger, Fitting and the Total systematics. Also shown in the last error is the possible envelope of variation the central result due to uncertainty on spin-alignment of the J/psi.

Summary table of all sources of considered systematic uncertainty and statistical uncertainty (as a percentage) on the corrected inclusive J/psi production cross-section, for absolute J/psi rapidities within 0.75<|y|<1.5. The sources of systematic error shown are, in order, Acceptance, Muon recognition, Trigger, Fitting and the Total systematics. Also shown in the last error is the possible envelope of variation the central result due to uncertainty on spin-alignment of the J/psi.

Summary table of all sources of considered systematic uncertainty and statistical uncertainty (as a percentage) on the corrected inclusive J/psi production cross-section, for absolute rapidities within |y|<0.75. The sources of systematic error shown are, in order, Acceptance, Muon recognition, Trigger, Fitting and the Total systematics. Also shown in the last error is the possible envelope of variation the central result due to uncertainty on spin-alignment of the J/psi.

Breakdown of sources of systematic uncertainty on the non-prompt J/psi fraction measurements, for the bin |y|<0.75, as a function of the J/psi pT.

Breakdown of sources of systematic uncertainty on the non-prompt J/psi fraction measurements, for the bin 0.75<|y|<1.5, as a function of the J/psi pT.

Breakdown of sources of systematic uncertainty on the non-prompt J/psi fraction measurements, for the bin 1.75<|y|<2.0, as a function of the J/psi pT.

Breakdown of sources of systematic uncertainty on the non-prompt J/psi fraction measurements, for the bin 2.0<|y|<2.4, as a function of the J/psi pT.

dDeltaPhi distribution in 7 TeV P-P collisions.