The measured ratio of prompt negative to positive kaon production at 7000 GeV.

The measured ratio of prompt negative to positive pion production at 900 GeV.

The measured ratio of prompt negative to positive pion production at 7000 GeV.

The measured ratio of prompt proton+antiproton to charged pion production at 900 GeV.

The measured ratio of prompt proton+antiproton to charged pion production at 7000 GeV.

The measured ratio of prompt charged kaon to charged pion production at 900 GeV.

The measured ratio of prompt charged kaon to charged pion production at 7000 GeV.

The measured ratio of prompt proton+antiproton to charged kaon production at 900 GeV.

The measured ratio of prompt proton+antiproton to charged kaon production at 7000 GeV.

Inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 16.0-22.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 6 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 22.0-30.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 6 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 30.0-42.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 6 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 42.0-60.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 6 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 60.0-80.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 6 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 5.5-8.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 7 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 8.0-11.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 7 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 11.0-16.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 7 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 16.0-22.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 7 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 22.0-30.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 7 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 30.0-42.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 7 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 42.0-60.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 7 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 60.0-80.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 7 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 5.5-8.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 8 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 8.0-11.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 8 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 11.0-16.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 8 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 16.0-22.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 8 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 22.0-30.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 8 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 30.0-42.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 8 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 42.0-60.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 8 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 60.0-80.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 8 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 5.5-8.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 9 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 8.0-11.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 9 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 11.0-16.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 9 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 16.0-22.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 9 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 22.0-30.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 9 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 30.0-42.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 9 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 42.0-60.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 9 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 60.0-80.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 9 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 5.5-8.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 10 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 8.0-11.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 10 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 11.0-16.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 10 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 16.0-22.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 10 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 22.0-30.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 10 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 30.0-42.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 10 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 42.0-60.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 10 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 60.0-80.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 10 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 5.5-8.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 11 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 8.0-11.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 11 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 11.0-16.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 11 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 16.0-22.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 11 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 22.0-30.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 11 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 30.0-42.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 11 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 42.0-60.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 11 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 60.0-80.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 11 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Matrix of statistical correlation coefficients of the unfolded jet cross sections at low $Q^2$.

Matrix of statistical correlation coefficients of the unfolded normalised jet cross sections at low $Q^2$.

Inclusive jet cross sections for $P_T^{\rm jet}$ = 5-7 GeV$^2$ measured as a function of $Q^2$ in the range 150-15000 GeV$^2$. The cross section values and uncertainties have been determined in the scope of the analysis of an earlier H1 publication (<a href="https://inspirehep.net/record/1301218">INSPIRE</a>, <a href="https://www.hepdata.net/record/ins1301218">HEPData</a>). See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections for $P_T^{\rm jet}$ = 5-7 GeV$^2$ measured as a function of $Q^2$ in the range 150-15000 GeV$^2$. The cross section values and uncertainties have been determined in the scope of the analysis of an earlier H1 publication (<a href="https://inspirehep.net/record/1301218">INSPIRE</a>, <a href="https://www.hepdata.net/record/ins1301218">HEPData</a>). See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Matrix of statistical correlation coefficients of the unfolded jet cross sections at high $Q^2$. The statistical correlations have been determined in the scope of the analysis of an earlier H1 publication (<a href="https://inspirehep.net/record/1301218">INSPIRE</a>, <a href="https://www.hepdata.net/record/ins1301218">HEPData</a>).

Matrix of statistical correlation coefficients of the unfolded normalised jet cross sections at high $Q^2$. The statistical correlations have been determined in the scope of the analysis of an earlier H1 publication (<a href="https://inspirehep.net/record/1301218">INSPIRE</a>, <a href="https://www.hepdata.net/record/ins1301218">HEPData</a>).

The strong coupling extracted from the normalised inclusive jet, dijet and trijet data at NLO as a function of the renormalisation scale $\mu_r$. For each $\mu_r$ the values of the strong coupling $\alpha_s(\mu_r)$ and the equivalent values $\alpha_s(M_Z)$ are given with experimental (exp) and theoretical (th) uncertainties.

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the fourth-leading from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++),and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the leading jet from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++),and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the sub-leading from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++),and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the third-leading from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++),and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the fourth-leading from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++),and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiSoft distribution from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++), and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS contribution is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiMin distribution from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++), and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS contribution is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaY distribution from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++), and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS contribution is expected.

Comparison of the phi_ij distribution from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++), and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS contribution is expected.

Comparison of the Deltap_{T,Soft} distribution from data to different PYTHIA 8 (P8), HERWIG ++ (H++), and HERWIG 7 (H7) tunes. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS contribution is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaS distribution from data to different PYTHIA 8 (P8), HERWIG ++ (H++), and HERWIG 7 (H7) tunes. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS contribution is expected.

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the leading jet from data with different KATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), and POWHEG(PW) models

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the sub-leading from data with different KATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), and POWHEG(PW) models

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the third-leading from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++),and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the fourth-leading from data with different KATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), and POWHEG(PW) models

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the leading jet from data with different KATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), and POWHEG(PW) models

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the sub-leading from data with different KATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), and POWHEG(PW) models

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the third-leading from data with different KATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), and POWHEG(PW) models

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the fourth-leading from data with different KATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), and POWHEG(PW) models

Comparison of the DeltaPhiSoft distribution from data to differentKATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiMin, distribution from data to differentKATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaY and distribution from data to differentKATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the phi_ij distribution from data to differentKATIE(KT), MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the Deltap_{T,Soft} distribution from data to different KATIE(KT),MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations. All distributions havebeen normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaS distribution from data to different KATIE(KT),MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations. All distributions havebeen normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the leading jet from data with different SPS+DPS KATIE( KT) and PYTHIA8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the sub-leading from data with different SPS+DPS KATIE( KT) and PYTHIA8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the third-leading from data with different SPS+DPS KATIE( KT) and PYTHIA8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the pT spectrum for the fourth-leading from data with different SPS+DPS KATIE( KT) and PYTHIA8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the leading jet from data with different SPS+DPS KATIE( KT) and PYTHIA8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the sub-leading from data with different SPS+DPS KATIE( KT) and PYTHIA8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the third-leading from data with different SPS+DPS KATIE( KT) and PYTHIA8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the eta spectrum for the fourth-leading from data with different SPS+DPS KATIE( KT) and PYTHIA8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiSoft distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiMin distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaY distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the phi_ij distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the Deltap_{T,Soft} distributions from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models. All distributions havebeen normalized to regions where a reduced DPS sensitivity is expected.

Comparison of the DeltaS distributions from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models. All distributions have been normalized to regions where a reduced DPS contribution is expected.

The DeltaS distribution obtained from the mixed data sample compared to predictions from the pure DPS sample in PYTHIA 8 (P8) and KATIE (KT). The distributions are normalized to unity.

The results of the template fit for the POWHEG (PW) NLO 2 -> 2 model without the hard MPI removed. As the DeltaS distribution obtained from the mixed data sample carries a statistical and systematic uncertainty, so does the total fitted sample.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiSoft distribution from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++), and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiMin distribution from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++), and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the DeltaY distribution from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++), and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the phi_ij distribution from data to different PYTHIA8 (P8),HERWIG++ (H++), and HERWIG7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the Deltap_{T,Soft} distribution from data to different PYTHIA 8 (P8), HERWIG ++ (H++), and HERWIG 7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the DeltaS distribution from data to different PYTHIA 8 (P8), HERWIG ++ (H++), and HERWIG 7 (H7) tunes.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiSoft distribution from data to different KATIE(KT),MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiMin distribution from data to different KATIE(KT),MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations.

Comparison of the DeltaY distribution from data to different KATIE(KT),MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations.

Comparison of the phi_ij distribution from data to different KATIE(KT),MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations.

Comparison of the Deltap_{T,Soft} distribution from data to different KATIE(KT),MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations.

Comparison of the DeltaS distribution from data to different KATIE(KT),MADGRAPH5aMC@NLO(MG5), andPOWHEG(PW) implementations.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiSoft distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the DeltaPhiMin distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the DeltaY distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the phi_ij distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the Deltap_{T,Soft} distribution from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models.

Comparison of the DeltaS distributions from data to different SPS+DPS KATIE (KT) and PYTHIA 8 (P8) models.

Distribution of $m_{T}(W)$ in the $N_{jet}\geq 3$ signal region.

Distribution of $M_{3}$ in the $N_{jet}\geq 3$ signal region.

Distribution of $M_{3}$ in the $N_{jet}\geq 3$ signal region.

Distribution of $m(l,\gamma)$ in the $N_{jet}\geq 3$ signal region.

Distribution of $m(l,\gamma)$ in the $N_{jet}\geq 3$ signal region.

Distribution of $\Delta R(l,\gamma)$ in the $N_{jet}\geq 3$ signal region.

Distribution of $\Delta R(l,\gamma)$ in the $N_{jet}\geq 3$ signal region.

Distribution of $\Delta R(j,\gamma)$ in the $N_{jet}\geq 3$ signal region.

Distribution of $\Delta R(j,\gamma)$ in the $N_{jet}\geq 3$ signal region.

Fit result of the multijet template obtained with loosely isolated leptons and the electroweak background to the measured $m_{T}(W)$ distribution with isolated leptons in the $N_{jet}=2$, $N_{b jet}=0$ selection for electrons.

Fit result of the multijet template obtained with loosely isolated leptons and the electroweak background to the measured $m_{T}(W)$ distribution with isolated leptons in the $N_{jet}=2$, $N_{b jet}=0$ selection for electrons.

Fit result of the multijet template obtained with loosely isolated leptons and the electroweak background to the measured $m_{T}(W)$ distribution with isolated leptons in the $N_{jet}=2$, $N_{b jet}=0$ selection for muons.

Fit result of the multijet template obtained with loosely isolated leptons and the electroweak background to the measured $m_{T}(W)$ distribution with isolated leptons in the $N_{jet}=2$, $N_{b jet}=0$ selection for muons.

Distribution of the invariant mass of the lepton and the photon ($m(l,\gamma)$) in the $N_{jet}\geq 3$, $N_{b jet}=0$ selection for the e channel.

Distribution of the invariant mass of the lepton and the photon ($m(l,\gamma)$) in the $N_{jet}\geq 3$, $N_{b jet}=0$ selection for the e channel.

Distribution of the invariant mass of the lepton and the photon ($m(l,\gamma)$) in the $N_{jet}\geq 3$, $N_{b jet}=0$ selection for the $\mu$ channel.

Distribution of the invariant mass of the lepton and the photon ($m(l,\gamma)$) in the $N_{jet}\geq 3$, $N_{b jet}=0$ selection for the $\mu$ channel.

Predicted and observed yields in the control regions in the $N_{jet}= 3$ and $\geq 4$ seletions using the post-fit values of the nuisance parameters.

Predicted and observed yields in the control regions in the $N_{jet}= 3$ and $\geq 4$ seletions using the post-fit values of the nuisance parameters.

Predicted and observed yields in the signal regions in the $N_{jet}= 3$ and $\geq 4$ seletions using the post-fit values of the nuisance parameters.

Predicted and observed yields in the signal regions in the $N_{jet}= 3$ and $\geq 4$ seletions using the post-fit values of the nuisance parameters.

The measured inclusive ttgamma cross section in the fiducial phase space compared to the prediction from simulation using Madgraph_aMC@NLO at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV.

The measured inclusive ttgamma cross section in the fiducial phase space compared to the prediction from simulation using Madgraph_aMC@NLO at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV.

Summary of the measured cross section ratios with respect to the NLO cross section prediction for signal regions binned in the electron channel, muon channel and the combined single lepton measurement.

Summary of the measured cross section ratios with respect to the NLO cross section prediction for signal regions binned in the electron channel, muon channel and the combined single lepton measurement.

The unfolded differential cross sections for $p_{T}(\gamma)$ and the comparison to simulations.

The unfolded differential cross sections for $p_{T}(\gamma)$ and the comparison to simulations.

The unfolded differential cross sections for $|\eta(\gamma)|$ and the comparison to simulations.

The unfolded differential cross sections for $|\eta(\gamma)|$ and the comparison to simulations.

The unfolded differential cross sections for $\Delta R(l,\gamma)$ and the comparison to simulations.

The unfolded differential cross sections for $\Delta R(l,\gamma)$ and the comparison to simulations.

Summary of the one-dimensional intervals at 68 and 95% CL.

Summary of the one-dimensional intervals at 68 and 95% CL.

The observed and predicted post-fit yields for the combined Run 2 data set in the SR3 signal region for the electron channel.

The observed and predicted post-fit yields for the combined Run 2 data set in the SR3 signal region for the electron channel.

The observed and predicted post-fit yields for the combined Run 2 data set in the SR3 signal region for the muon channel.

The observed and predicted post-fit yields for the combined Run 2 data set in the SR3 signal region for the muon channel.

The observed and predicted post-fit yields for the combined Run 2 data set in the SR4p signal region for the electron channel.

The observed and predicted post-fit yields for the combined Run 2 data set in the SR4p signal region for the electron channel.

The observed and predicted post-fit yields for the combined Run 2 data set in the SR4p signal region for the muon channel.

The observed and predicted post-fit yields for the combined Run 2 data set in the SR4p signal region for the muon channel.

Negative log-likelihood ratio values with respect to the best fit value of the one-dimensional profiled scan for the Wilson coefficient $c_{tZ}$.

Negative log-likelihood ratio values with respect to the best fit value of the one-dimensional profiled scan for the Wilson coefficient $c_{tZ}$.

Negative log-likelihood ratio values with respect to the best fit value of the one-dimensional scan for the Wilson coefficient $c_{tZ}$.

Negative log-likelihood ratio values with respect to the best fit value of the one-dimensional scan for the Wilson coefficient $c_{tZ}$.

Negative log-likelihood ratio values with respect to the best fit value of the two-dimensional scan for the Wilson coefficients $c_{tZ}$ and $c^{I}_{tZ}$.

Negative log-likelihood ratio values with respect to the best fit value of the two-dimensional scan for the Wilson coefficients $c_{tZ}$ and $c^{I}_{tZ}$.

Normalized differential cross section distribution as a function of the leading b jet transverse momentum for the Z + >= 1 b jet events

Differential cross section distribution as a function of the leading b jet absolute pseudorapidity for the Z + >= 1 b jet events

Normalized differential cross section distribution as a function of the leading b jet absolute pseudorapidity for the Z + >= 1 b jet events

Differential cross section distribution as a function of the leading b jet transverse momentum for Z +>= 1 b jet events

Normalized differential cross section distribution as a function of azimuthal difference between Z boson and the leading b jet for the Z + >= 1 b jet events

Differential cross section distribution as a function of the rapidity difference between Z boson and the leading b jet for the Z + >= 1 b jet events

Normalized differential cross section distribution as a function of the rapidity difference between Z boson and the leading b jet for the Z + >= 1 b jet events

Differential cross section distribution as a function of the angular separation between the Z boson and the leading b jet for the Z + >= 1 b jet events

Normalized differential cross section distribution as a function of the angular separation between the Z boson and the leading b jet for the Z + >= 1 b jet events

Differential cross section distribution as a function of the leading b jet transverse momentum for the Z + >= 2 b jet events

Normalized differential cross section distribution as a function of the leading b jet transverse momentum for the Z + >= 2 b jet events

Differential cross section distribution as a function of the leading b jet absolute pseudorapidity

Normalized differential cross section distribution as a function of the leading b jet absolute pseudorapidity

Differential cross section distribution as a function of the subleading b jet transverse momentum for the Z + >= 2 b jet events

Normalized differential cross section distribution as a function of the subleading b jet transverse momentum for the Z + >= 2 b jet events

Differential cross section distribution as a function of the Z boson transverse momentum for the Z + >= 2 b jet events

Normalized differential cross section distribution as a function of the Z boson transverse momentum for the Z + >= 2 b jet events

Differential cross section as a function of the angular separation between two b jets for the Z + >= 2 b jet events

Normalized differential cross section as a function of the angular separtion between two b jets for the Z + >= 2 b jet events

Differential cross section as a function of the minimum angular separation between the Z boson and two b jets for the Z + >= 2 b jet events

Normalized differential cross section as a function of the minimum angular separation between the Z boson and two b jets for the Z + >= 2 b jet events

Differential cross section as a function of the asymmetry of the Z + >= 2 b jets system

Normalized differential cross section as a function of the asymmetry of the Z + >= 2 b jets system

Differential cross section as a function of the invariant mass of two b jets for the Z + >= 2 b jet events

Normalized differential cross section as a function of the invariant mass of two b jets for the Z + >= 2 b jet events

Differential cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the Z boson and two b jets for the Z + >= 2 b jet events

Normalized differential cross section as a function of invariant mass of the Z boson and two b jets for the Z + >= 2 b jet events

Distributions of the cross section ratios as a function of the leading b jet transverse momentum

Distributions of the cross section ratios as a function of the leading b jet absolute pseudorapidity

Fiducial Upsilon(3S) production cross-section, where pT>4 GeV and |eta|<2.3 for both muons, as a function of Upsilon(3S) pT in the Upsilon(3S) rapidity (|y|) bins 0-1.2 and 1.2-2.25. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic.

Fiducial Upsilon(nS) production cross-section, where pT>4 GeV and |eta|<2.3 for both muons, as a function of Upsilon(nS) rapidity (|y|) in Upsilon(nS) PT ranging from 0 - 70 GeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic.

Inclusive Upsilon(1S) production cross-section as a function of Upsilon(1S) pT in the Upsilon(1S) rapidity (|y|) bins 0-1.2 and 1.2-2.25. 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 Upsilon(2S) production cross-section as a function of Upsilon(2S) pT in the Upsilon(2S) rapidity (|y|) bins 0-1.2 and 1.2-2.25. 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 Upsilon(3S) production cross-section as a function of Upsilon(3S) pT in the Upsilon(3S) rapidity (|y|) bins 0-1.2 and 1.2-2.25. 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 Upsilon(nS) production cross-section as a function of Upsilon(nS) rapidity (|y|) in Upsilon(nS) PT ranging from 0 - 70 GeV. 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.

Ratio of Upsilon(2S) to Upsilon(1S) inclusive cross-section as a function of Upsilon pT in the Upsilon rapidity (|y|) bins 0-1.2 and 1.2-2.25. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic.

Ratio of Upsilon(3S) to Upsilon(1S) inclusive cross-section as a function of Upsilon pT in the Upsilon rapidity (|y|) bins 0-1.2 and 1.2-2.25. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic.

Ratio of Upsilon(2S) and Upsilon(3S) to Upsilon(1S) inclusive cross-section as a function of Upsilon rapidity (|y|) in Upsilon pT 0 - 70 GeV. The first uncertainty is statistical, the second is systematic.

Differential cross-section for non-prompt chi_c2 production, measured in bins of J/psi pT, assuming unpolarised chi_c production. The measurements are not corrected for the branching fractions of the decays chi_c --> J/psi + gamma and J/psi --> mu+ mu-. The uncertainty envelope associated with the unknown chi_c spin alignment is also shown.

Differential cross-section for prompt chi_c1 production, measured in bins of chi_c1 pT, assuming unpolarised chi_c production. The measurements are not corrected for the branching fractions of the decays chi_c --> J/psi + gamma and J/psi --> mu+ mu-. The uncertainty envelope associated with the unknown chi_c spin alignment is also shown.

Differential cross-section for prompt chi_c2 production, measured in bins of chi_c2 pT, assuming unpolarised chi_c production. The measurements are not corrected for the branching fractions of the decays chi_c --> J/psi + gamma and J/psi --> mu+ mu-. The uncertainty envelope associated with the unknown chi_c spin alignment is also shown.

Differential cross-section for non-prompt chi_c1 production, measured in bins of chi_c1 pT, assuming unpolarised chi_c production. The measurements are not corrected for the branching fractions of the decays chi_c --> J/psi + gamma and J/psi --> mu+ mu-. The uncertainty envelope associated with the unknown chi_c spin alignment is also shown.

Differential cross-section for non-prompt chi_c2 production, measured in bins of chi_c2 pT, assuming unpolarised chi_c production. The measurements are not corrected for the branching fractions of the decays chi_c --> J/psi + gamma and J/psi --> mu+ mu-. The uncertainty envelope associated with the unknown chi_c spin alignment is also shown.

Fraction of prompt J/psi produced in feed-down from radiative chi_c decays as a function of J/psi pT, assuming unpolarised chi_c production. The uncertainty envelope associated with the unknown chi_c spin alignment is also shown. The spin-alignment envelope assumes that prompt J/psi are produced unpolarised and represents the maximum uncertainty due to the unknown chi_c spin alignment.

Production rate of prompt chi_c2 relative to prompt chi_c1, measured in bins of J/psi pT, assuming unpolarised chi_c production. The ratio is not corrected for the branching fractions of chi_c1 and chi_c2 into J/psi gamma. The uncertainty envelope associated with the unknown chi_c spin alignment is also shown.

Production rate of non-prompt chi_c2 relative to non-prompt chi_c1, measured in bins of J/psi pT, assuming unpolarised chi_c production. The ratio is not corrected for the branching fractions of chi_c1 and chi_c2 into J/psi gamma. The uncertainty envelope associated with the unknown chi_c spin alignment is also shown.

Fraction of chi_c1 produced in b-hadron decays as a function of chi_c1 pT, assuming unpolarised chi_c production. The uncertainty envelope associated with the unknown chi_c spin alignment is also shown.

Fraction of chi_c2 produced in b-hadron decays as a function of chi_c2 pT, assuming unpolarised chi_c production. The uncertainty envelope associated with the unknown chi_c spin alignment is also shown.

The cross section ratio for a Z boson produced with at least one b-jet, relative to a Z boson produced with at least one jet of any flavour.

Double differential production cross sections of J/PSI mesons from B decays as a function of transverse momentum and rapidity in the FORWARD region. The errors shown are statistical and the uncorrelated and correlated components of the systematic uncertainties.

The nuclear modification factor RpPB for PT < 14 GeV/c in the BACKWARD and FORWARD regions.

The FORWARD/BACKWARD production ratio R(FB) as a function of rapidity for PT < 14 GeV/c.

The FORWARD/BACKWARD production ratioo (R(FB) as a function of PT with |yrap|=2.5-4.0.