The spin transfer $D_{LL}$ to (a) $\Lambda$ and (b) $\bar{\Lambda}$ hyperons produced at positive pseudorapidity with respect to the polarized proton beam from $MB$, $JP$, and $HT$ data versus hyperon transverse momenta $p_{T}$. The sizes of the statistical and systematic uncertainties are indicated by the vertical bars and bands, respectively. For clarity, the HT data points have been shifted slightly in $p_{T}$. The dotted vertical lines indicate the $p_{T}$ intervals in the analysis of HT and JP data.

Comparison of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ spin transfer $D_{LL}$ in polarized proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 200 GeV$ for (a) positive and (b) negative $\eta$ versus $p_{T}$. The vertical bars and bands indicate the sizes of the statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively. The $\bar{\Lambda}$ data points have been shifted slightly in $p_{T}$ for clarity. The dotted vertical lines indicate the $p_{T}$ intervals in the analysis of HT and JP data. The horizontal lines show model predictions evaluated at $\eta$ and largest $p_{T}$ of the data.

Comparison of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ spin transfer $D_{LL}$ in polarized proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV for (a) positive and (b) negative $\eta$ versus $p_{T}$. The vertical bars and bands indicate the sizes of the statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively. The $\bar{\Lambda}$ data points have been shifted slightly in $p_{T}$ for clarity. The dotted vertical lines indicate the $p_{T}$ intervals in the analysis of HT and JP data. The horizontal lines show model predictions evaluated at $\eta$ and largest $p_{T}$ of the data.

The spin transfer $D_{LL}$ to (a) $\Lambda$ and (b) $\bar{\Lambda}$ hyperons, calculated using the new $\alpha_\Lambda=0.732$ updated on PDG2020, produced at positive pseudorapidity with respect to the polarized proton beam from $MB$, $JP$, and $HT$ data versus hyperon transverse momenta $p_{T}$. The sizes of the statistical and systematic uncertainties are indicated by the vertical bars and bands, respectively. For clarity, the HT data points have been shifted slightly in $p_{T}$. The dotted vertical lines indicate the $p_{T}$ intervals in the analysis of HT and JP data.

The spin transfer $D_{LL}$ to (a) $\Lambda$ and (b) $\bar{\Lambda}$ hyperons, calculated using the new $\alpha_\Lambda=0.732$ updated on PDG2020, produced at positive pseudorapidity with respect to the polarized proton beam from $MB$, $JP$, and $HT$ data versus hyperon transverse momenta $p_{T}$. The sizes of the statistical and systematic uncertainties are indicated by the vertical bars and bands, respectively. For clarity, the HT data points have been shifted slightly in $p_{T}$. The dotted vertical lines indicate the $p_{T}$ intervals in the analysis of HT and JP data.

Comparison of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ spin transfer $D_{LL}$, calculated using the new $\alpha_\Lambda=0.732$ updated on PDG2020, in polarized proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV for (a) positive and (b) negative $\eta$ versus $p_{T}$. The vertical bars and bands indicate the sizes of the statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively. The $\bar{\Lambda}$ data points have been shifted slightly in $p_{T}$ for clarity. The dotted vertical lines indicate the $p_{T}$ intervals in the analysis of HT and JP data. The horizontal lines show model predictions evaluated at $\eta$ and largest $p_{T}$ of the data.

Observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(gg)g) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance. The acceptance $\mathcal{A}$ is defined as $\mathcal{A} = N$(events with $m_{X}^{GEN} > 85\% m_{X}^{input}$) / $N$(events generated in the full phase space defined by the CMS default generator settings). Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Mass exclusion ranges of the benchmark signal scenarios are depicted with hatched areas inside the black contours.

Observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(qq)q) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance. The acceptance $\mathcal{A}$ is defined as $\mathcal{A} = N$(events with $m_{X}^{GEN} > 85\% m_{X}^{input}$) / $N$(events generated in the full phase space defined by the CMS default generator settings). Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Mass exclusion ranges of the benchmark signal scenarios are depicted with hatched areas inside the black contours.

Efficiencies of the selection requirements on the benchmark signal processes: $Z_{R} \to ggg$ with nominal width ($\Gamma_{X}/m_{X}\sim 3\%$). A value of -1 means that the corresponding efficiency is not calculated for this year.

Efficiencies of the selection requirements on the benchmark signal processes: $Z_{R} \to ggg$ with narrow width ($\Gamma_{X}/m_{X}\sim 0.01\%$). A value of -1 means that the corresponding efficiency is not calculated for this year.

Efficiencies of the selection requirements on the benchmark signal processes: $G_{KK} \to {\varphi}(gg)g$, where $\varphi$ is the radion. A value of -1 means that the corresponding efficiency is not calculated for this year.

Efficiencies of the selection requirements on the benchmark signal processes: $q^{*} \to V(qq)q$, where $V$ is a beyond-the-SM vector boson. A value of -1 means that the corresponding efficiency is not calculated for this year.

Acceptance of the signal selection requirement $m_{X}^{\text{GEN}}/m_{X}^{\text{input}} > 85\%$ on the benchmark signal process $Z_{R} \to ggg$. The acceptance is defined as $\mathcal{A} = N$(events with $m_{X}^{\text{GEN}}/m_{X}^{\text{input}} > 85\%$)/$N$(events generated in the full phase space defined by the CMS default generator settings).

Acceptance of the signal selection requirement $m_{X}^{\text{GEN}}/m_{X}^{\text{input}} > 85\%$ on the benchmark signal process $G_{KK} \to {\varphi}(gg)g$.

Acceptance of the signal selection requirement $m_{X}^{\text{GEN}}/m_{X}^{\text{input}} > 85\%$ on the benchmark signal process $q^{*} \to V(qq)q$.

Observed local significance for a 3-body decay $ggg$ resonance, shown for resonances with nominal width (blue solid line) and narrow width (red dashed line).

Observed local significance for a cascade decay $ggg$ resonance.

Observed local significance for a cascade decay $qqq$ resonance.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(gg)g) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.2$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(gg)g) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.3$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(gg)g) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.4$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(gg)g) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.5$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(gg)g) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.6$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(gg)g) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.7$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(gg)g) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.8$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(qq)q) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.2$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(qq)q) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.3$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(qq)q) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.4$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(qq)q) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.5$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(qq)q) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.6$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(qq)q) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.7$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal.

Expected and observed limits at 95% CL on $\sigma \mathcal{B} (X \to Y(qq)q) \mathcal{A}$ for a cascade decay trijet resonance with $m_{Y} / m_{X} = 0.8$. Only 2016 data are used to derive limits below 2.0 TeV because of higher trigger thresholds in 2017 and 2018. Theoretical predictions of the benchmark are depicted with the red curve. A value of -1 in the table means that the corresponding theoretical prediction is not calculated for this signal

Cut flow table of the selection requirments for the $Z_{R}$ model scenarios. Values shown are absolute efficiencies, e.g., values shown in the column of 'Efficiency ($\Delta_{R}^{max} < 3.0$)' represent the cumulative efficiencies achieved through all selection requirements applied up to and including the current selection criterion.

Cut flow table of the selection requirments for the $G_{KK}$ model scenarios. Values shown are absolute efficiencies, e.g., values shown in the column of 'Efficiency ($\Delta_{R}^{max} < 3.0$)' represent the cumulative efficiencies achieved through all selection requirements applied up to and including the current selection criterion.

Cut flow table of the selection requirments for the $q^{*}$ model scenarios. Values shown are absolute efficiencies, e.g., values shown in the column of 'Efficiency ($\Delta_{R}^{max} < 3.0$)' represent the cumulative efficiencies achieved through all selection requirements applied up to and including the current selection criterion.

Predicted production cross section of the benchmark signal process $pp \to Z_{R} \to ggg$.

Predicted production cross section of the benchmark signal process $pp \to G_{KK} \to \varphi(gg)g$.

Predicted production cross section of the benchmark signal process $pp \to q^{*} \to V(qq)q$.

Correlation matrix for the differential branching fraction extraction between different $q^2$ bins in the simultaneous fit.

The product of acceptance and efficiency ($A\epsilon$) of the $\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{B}^+\to\mathrm{K}^+\mu^+\mu^-)$ channel, as a function of the muon pair $q^2$, as measured in simulated signal events, after all the corrections applied. In the figure, regions corresponding to resonances are displayed with red markers.

Same as Table 5, but for the bins containing the J$\psi$ and $\psi$(2S) resonances.

Integrated branching fraction $\mathcal{B}(\mathrm{B}^\pm \to \mathrm{K}^\pm\mu^+\mu^-)$ in the low-$q^2$ region.

Ratio of branching fractions $\mathcal{B}(\text{B}^\pm \to \text{K}^\pm\mu^+\mu^-)$ to $\mathcal{B}(\text{B}^\pm \to \text{K}^\pm\text{e}^+\text{e}^-)$, determined from the measured double ratio $R$(K) of these decays to the respective branching fractions of the decay chains $\text{B}^\pm\to\text{J/}\psi\text{K}^\pm$ with $\text{J/}\psi\to\mu^+\mu^-$ and $\text{e}^+\text{e}^-$.

Negative log likelihood function from the fit profiled as a function of the inverse ratio $R(\mathrm{K})^{-1}$.

Postfit score of the $\text{t}\bar{\text{t}}\text{Z}$ output node from the multiclass classifier in $\text{SR}_\text{3l,3j}$ for events with at least 2 b jets

Postfit score of the tWZ output node from the binary classifier in $\text{SR}_\text{3l,2j}$

$\text{p}_\text{T}$ of the leading jet in the $\text{SR}_\text{3l,2j}$

$\text{p}_\text{T}$ of the leading lepton in the $\text{SR}_\text{3l,2j}$

Max $\text{p}_\text{T}$ of the lepton-jet in the $\text{SR}_\text{3l,3j}$

Invariant mass of the system of leptons, jets, and $\vec{\text{p}}^\text{miss}_\text{T}$ in the $\text{SR}_\text{3l,3j}$

Two-dimensional likelihood scan of the signal strenghts of tWZ ($\mu_\text{tWZ}$) vs. $\text{t}\bar{\text{t}}\text{Z}$ ($\mu_{\text{t}\bar{\text{t}}\text{Z}}$). The blue lines show the 68%, 95%, and 99% confidence level contours. The black cross represents the best-fit value, while the red diamond the SM expectation

Two-dimensional likelihood scan of the signal strenghts of tWZ ($\mu_\text{tWZ}$) vs. $\text{t}\bar{\text{t}}\text{Z}$ ($\mu_{\text{t}\bar{\text{t}}\text{Z}}$). The blue lines show the 68%, 95%, and 99% confidence level contours. The black cross represents the best-fit value, while the red diamond the SM expectation

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{1})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{2})|$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{2})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})|$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $\Delta\mathrm{R}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $\mathrm{m}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $\Delta\mathrm{R}_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{avg}}$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{3})|$ in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{3})|$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3})$ in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{4})|$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{4})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $H^{\mathrm{b}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $H^{\mathrm{b}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\Delta\phi(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1},\mathrm{b}_{\mathrm{soft}})|$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\Delta\phi(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1},\mathrm{b}_{\mathrm{soft}})|$ in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})|$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{2})|$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{2})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})|$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $\Delta\mathrm{R}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $\mathrm{m}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $H^{\mathrm{j}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $H^{\mathrm{j}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $\mathrm{m}_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{max}}$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $H^{\mathrm{light}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $H^{\mathrm{light}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Normalized differential cross section of $N_{\mathrm{b}}$ in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space.

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{1})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{1})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{2})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{2})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $\Delta\mathrm{R}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $\mathrm{m}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $\Delta\mathrm{R}_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{avg}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{3})|$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{3})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3})$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{4})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{4})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $H^{\mathrm{b}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $H^{\mathrm{b}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\Delta\phi(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1},\mathrm{b}_{\mathrm{soft}})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\Delta\phi(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1},\mathrm{b}_{\mathrm{soft}})|$ observable in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{2})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{2})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $\Delta\mathrm{R}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $\mathrm{m}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ observable in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $H^{\mathrm{j}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $H^{\mathrm{j}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $\mathrm{m}_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{max}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $H^{\mathrm{light}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $H^{\mathrm{light}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Correlation of parameters of interest in fit of $N_{\mathrm{b}}$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{1})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{1})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{2})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}}_{2})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $\Delta\mathrm{R}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $\mathrm{m}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{add.}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $\Delta\mathrm{R}_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{avg}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{3})|$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{3})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3})$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{3})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}_{4})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}_{4})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $H^{\mathrm{b}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $H^{\mathrm{b}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\Delta\phi(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1},\mathrm{b}_{\mathrm{soft}})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\Delta\phi(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1},\mathrm{b}_{\mathrm{soft}})|$ observable in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{2})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{2})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $|\eta(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})|$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $\Delta\mathrm{R}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $\mathrm{m}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}^{\mathrm{extra}})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $p_{\mathrm{T}}(\mathrm{lj}^{\mathrm{extra}}_{1})$ observable in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $H^{\mathrm{j}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $H^{\mathrm{j}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $\mathrm{m}_{\mathrm{b}\mathrm{b}}^{\mathrm{max}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $H^{\mathrm{light}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $H^{\mathrm{light}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ observable in $\geq 7$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$, $\geq 3$ light phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $N_{\mathrm{jets}}$ observable in $\geq 6$ jets: $\geq 4 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Covariances of all nuisance parameters and POIs in fit of $N_{\mathrm{b}}$ observable in $\geq 5$ jets: $\geq 3 \mathrm{b}$ phase space

Fiducial cross sections from the measurements of all observables, compared to predictions from different ttbb simulation approaches. For each of the normalized differential measurements the fiducial cross section in the respective phase space is also determined. In the paper only one representative observable is quoted for each fiducial phase space, while here the measured cross section with the uncertainties from the fit to the respective observable is summarized.

Correlation matrix associated to the statistical covariance matrix of the data and MC for the primary Lund jet plane density for AK8 jets in a one-dimensional representation with bin indices. The mapping between the bin indices and the physical binning can be imported from the XML file attached to this HepData record using the TUnfoldBinningXML class of ROOT (qualitatively, it corresponds to slicing the Lund plane horizontally from low kT to high kT).

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{\Lambda1}$ using Approach 1. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{a3}$ using Approach 1. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{a3}$ using Approach 1. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{\Lambda1}^{Z\gamma}$ using Approach 1. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{\Lambda1}^{Z\gamma}$ using Approach 1. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{a2}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are fixed to zero. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{a2}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are fixed to zero. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{\Lambda1}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are fixed to zero. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{\Lambda1}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are fixed to zero. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{a3}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are fixed to zero. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{a3}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are fixed to zero. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{a2}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are left floating in the fit. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{a2}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are left floating in the fit. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{\Lambda1}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are left floating in the fit. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{\Lambda1}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are left floating in the fit. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters. Axis scales are varied to improve the visibility of important features.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{a3}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are left floating in the fit. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{a3}$ using Approach 2. The other two anomalous coupling cross section fractions are left floating in the fit. The signal strength modifiers are treated as free parameters.

Expected profiled likelihood on the $\delta c_{Z}$ coupling of the SMEFT Higgs basis.

Observed profiled likelihood on the $\delta c_{Z}$ coupling of the SMEFT Higgs basis.

Expected profiled likelihood on the $c_{Z\Box}$ coupling of the SMEFT Higgs basis.

Observed profiled likelihood on the $c_{Z\Box}$ coupling of the SMEFT Higgs basis.

Expected profiled likelihood on the $c_{ZZ}$ coupling of the SMEFT Higgs basis.

Observed profiled likelihood on the $c_{ZZ}$ coupling of the SMEFT Higgs basis.

Expected profiled likelihood on the $\tilde{c}_{ZZ}$ coupling of the SMEFT Higgs basis.

Observed profiled likelihood on the $\tilde{c}_{ZZ}$ coupling of the SMEFT Higgs basis.

Expected profiled likelihood on $f_{a3}^{ggH}$. The signal strength modifiers and the CP-odd HVV anomalous coupling cross section fraction are treated as free parameters.

Observed profiled likelihood on $f_{a3}^{ggH}$. The signal strength modifiers and the CP-odd HVV anomalous coupling cross section fraction are treated as free parameters.

Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on $|V_\mathrm{N}|^2$ as a function of $m_\mathrm{N}$ for the mixing scenario ($r_e$, $r_\mu$, $r_\tau$) = (0.33, 0.33, 0.33) and in the Majorana scenario.

Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on $|V_\mathrm{N}|^2$ as a function of $m_\mathrm{N}$ for the mixing scenario ($r_e$, $r_\mu$, $r_\tau$) = (0.0, 1.0, 0.0) and in the Dirac-like scenario.

Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on $|V_\mathrm{N}|^2$ as a function of $m_\mathrm{N}$ for the mixing scenario ($r_e$, $r_\mu$, $r_\tau$) = (0.0, 0.5, 0.5) and in the Dirac-like scenario.

Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on $|V_\mathrm{N}|^2$ as a function of $m_\mathrm{N}$ for the mixing scenario ($r_e$, $r_\mu$, $r_\tau$) = (0.5, 0.5, 0.0) and in the Dirac-like scenario.

Expected and observed 95% CL upper limits on $|V_\mathrm{N}|^2$ as a function of $m_\mathrm{N}$ for the mixing scenario ($r_e$, $r_\mu$, $r_\tau$) = (0.33, 0.33, 0.33) and in the Dirac-like scenario.

Observed 95% CL lower limits on $c\tau_\mathrm{N}$ as functions of the mixing ratios ($r_e$, $r_\mu$, $r_\tau$) for a fixed N mass of 1.0 GeV in the Majorana scenario.

Observed 95% CL lower limits on $c\tau_\mathrm{N}$ as functions of the mixing ratios ($r_e$, $r_\mu$, $r_\tau$) for a fixed N mass of 1.5 GeV in the Majorana scenario.

Observed 95% CL lower limits on $c\tau_\mathrm{N}$ as functions of the mixing ratios ($r_e$, $r_\mu$, $r_\tau$) for a fixed N mass of 2.0 GeV in the Majorana scenario.

Observed 95% CL lower limits on $c\tau_\mathrm{N}$ as functions of the mixing ratios ($r_e$, $r_\mu$, $r_\tau$) for a fixed N mass of 1.0 GeV in the Dirac-like scenario.

Observed 95% CL lower limits on $c\tau_\mathrm{N}$ as functions of the mixing ratios ($r_e$, $r_\mu$, $r_\tau$) for a fixed N mass of 1.5 GeV in the Dirac-like scenario.

Observed 95% CL lower limits on $c\tau_\mathrm{N}$ as functions of the mixing ratios ($r_e$, $r_\mu$, $r_\tau$) for a fixed N mass of 2.0 GeV in the Dirac-like scenario.

Distributions of $S_{\mathrm{ML}}$ for data, simulated background and signal events with $n_{\mathrm{track}}$ of 4. The distributions are shown for split-SUSY signals with a gluino mass of 2000 GeV and neutralino mass of 1800 GeV. Different gluino proper decay lengths are shown as $c\tau$ in the legend. All distributions are normalized to unity.

Distributions of $S_{\mathrm{ML}}$ for data, simulated background and signal events with $n_{\mathrm{track}}$ of $\geq$ 5. The distributions are shown for split-SUSY signals with a gluino mass of 2000 GeV and neutralino mass of 1900 GeV. Different gluino proper decay lengths are shown as $c\tau$ in the legend. All distributions are normalized to unity.

Distributions of $S_{\mathrm{ML}}$ for data, simulated background and signal events with $n_{\mathrm{track}}$ of $\geq$ 5. The distributions are shown for split-SUSY signals with a gluino mass of 2000 GeV and neutralino mass of 1800 GeV. Different gluino proper decay lengths are shown as $c\tau$ in the legend. All distributions are normalized to unity.

The distribution of $n_{\mathrm{track}}$ in different $S_{\mathrm{ML}}$ regions for simulated background events. Events with 0 $ < S_{\mathrm{ML}} < $ 0.2 (blue), 0.2 $ < S_{\mathrm{ML}} < $ 0.6 (red), and 0.6 $ < S_{\mathrm{ML}} < $ 1.0 (green) are compared. All distributions are normalized to unity. The similar $n_{\mathrm{track}}$ distributions demonstrate that $n_{\mathrm{track}}$ and $S_{\mathrm{ML}}$ are decorrelated.

The distribution of $d_{\mathrm{BV}}$ in $K_{\mathrm{S}}^{\mathrm{0}}$ vertices in data (black) and simulation (purple). The lower panel shows the ratio between data and simulation.

The vertex reconstruction efficiency for artificially displaced vertices in data (black) and simulation (red). In this example, the artificially displaced vertices are corrected to mimic split-SUSY signal events with gluino mass of 2000 GeV and neutralino mass of 1800 GeV.

The ML tagging efficiency for artificially displaced vertices in data (black) and simulation (red). In this example, the artificially displaced vertices are corrected to mimic split-SUSY signal events with gluino mass of 2000 GeV and neutralino mass of 1800 GeV.

Number of predicted and observed events in the control, validation, and search regions. Predictions are calculated using Eqs. (2) and (3) and fitting the data under the background-only hypothesis. Regions are organized by $S_{\mathrm{ML}}$ and $n_{\mathrm{track}}$ values, and region names corresponding with Fig. 7 are given in parentheses. The predicted number of events that pass the $S_{\mathrm{ML}}$ selection and the observed number of events that pass or fail the $S_{\mathrm{ML}}$ selection are shown in seperate rows.

The 95% CL upper limit on the product of the cross section and branching fraction squared for the split-SUSY signal model with a mass splitting of 100 GeV, shown as a function of gluino mass and $c\tau$. The observed (solid black) and expected (dashed red) exclusion curves are overlaid on the limit plot.

The 95% CL upper limit on the product of the cross section and branching fraction squared for the split-SUSY signal model with a mass splitting of 100 GeV, shown as a function of gluino mass and $c\tau$. The observed (solid black) and expected (dashed red) exclusion curves are overlaid on the limit plot.

The 95% CL upper limit on the product of the cross section and branching fraction squared for the split-SUSY model with a $c\tau$ of 10 mm, shown as a function of gluino mass and mass splitting. The observed (solid black) and expected (dashed red) exclusion curves are overlaid on the limit plot.

The 95% CL upper limit on the product of the cross section and branching fraction squared for the split-SUSY model with a $c\tau$ of 10 mm, shown as a function of gluino mass and mass splitting. The observed (solid black) and expected (dashed red) exclusion curves are overlaid on the limit plot.

The 95% CL upper limit on the product of the cross section and branching fraction squared for the GMSB SUSY signal model, shown as a function of gluino mass and $c\tau$. The observed (solid black) and expected (dashed red) exclusion curves are overlaid on the limit plot.

The 95% CL upper limit on the product of the cross section and branching fraction squared for the GMSB SUSY signal model, shown as a function of gluino mass and $c\tau$. The observed (solid black) and expected (dashed red) exclusion curves are overlaid on the limit plot.

Observed upper limits at 95% CL on B($\text{H} \rightarrow \text{a}_{1}\text{a}_{1}$) in percent, obtained from the combination of the $\mu\mu$bb and $\tau\tau$bb channels. The results are obtained as functions of $m_{\text{a}_{1}}$ for 2HDM+S Type I (independent of tan$\beta$), Type II (tan$\beta$=2.0), Type III (tan$\beta$=2.0), and Type IV (tan$\beta$=0.6), respectively.

Unfolded E2C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E2C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E2C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E2C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E2C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E3C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E3C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E3C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E3C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E3C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E3C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E3C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E3C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E3C/E2C distributions in data compared to NLO+NNLL_approx predictions. Theoretial uncertainty in each bin is handled fully correlated as shape uncertainty. For the one-sided uncertainties, we symmetrize them when performing the fit.

Unfolded E3C/E2C distributions in data compared to NLO+NNLL_approx predictions. Theoretial uncertainty in each bin is handled fully correlated as shape uncertainty. For the one-sided uncertainties, we symmetrize them when performing the fit.

Unfolded E3C/E2C distributions in data compared to NLO+NNLL_approx predictions. Theoretial uncertainty in each bin is handled fully correlated as shape uncertainty. For the one-sided uncertainties, we symmetrize them when performing the fit.

Unfolded E3C/E2C distributions in data compared to NLO+NNLL_approx predictions. Theoretial uncertainty in each bin is handled fully correlated as shape uncertainty. For the one-sided uncertainties, we symmetrize them when performing the fit.

Unfolded E3C/E2C distributions in data compared to NLO+NNLL_approx predictions. Theoretial uncertainty in each bin is handled fully correlated as shape uncertainty. For the one-sided uncertainties, we symmetrize them when performing the fit.

Unfolded E3C/E2C distributions in data compared to NLO+NNLL_approx predictions. Theoretial uncertainty in each bin is handled fully correlated as shape uncertainty. For the one-sided uncertainties, we symmetrize them when performing the fit.

Unfolded E3C/E2C distributions in data compared to NLO+NNLL_approx predictions. Theoretial uncertainty in each bin is handled fully correlated as shape uncertainty. For the one-sided uncertainties, we symmetrize them when performing the fit.

Unfolded E3C/E2C distributions in data compared to NLO+NNLL_approx predictions. Theoretial uncertainty in each bin is handled fully correlated as shape uncertainty. For the one-sided uncertainties, we symmetrize them when performing the fit.

The fitted slopes of the E3C/E2C data distributions as a function of jet pt are used to illustrate the dependency of alphas on jet pt.

Unfolded E3C/E2C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E3C/E2C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E3C/E2C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E3C/E2C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E3C/E2C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E3C/E2C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E3C/E2C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

Unfolded E3C/E2C distributions in data compared to MC predictions.

The chi2 scan result using eq.3 for different alphas.

The correlation matrix is composed by 10 jet pt region, each region is represented by a block in the plot. Inside each block, there are 22 xL bins same as the E2C, E3C and E3C/E2C distributions. Therefore, the x and y bins of the correlation matrix is given by, binNumber = pT_index * 22 + xL_index.

The correlation matrix is composed by 10 jet pt region, each region is represented by a block in the plot. Inside each block, there are 22 xL bins same as the E2C, E3C and E3C/E2C distributions. Therefore, the x and y bins of the correlation matrix is given by, binNumber = pT_index * 22 + xL_index.

The correlation matrix is composed by 10 jet pt region, each region is represented by a block in the plot. Inside each block, there are 22 xL bins same as the E2C, E3C and E3C/E2C distributions. Therefore, the x and y bins of the correlation matrix is given by, binNumber = pT_index * 22 + xL_index.

The energy weight of E2C as defined in eq.1 in the paper is used in the unfolding, the binning is listed in this table.

The energy weight of E3C as defined in eq.1 in the paper is used in the unfolding, the binning is listed in this table.

Upper 95% CL limits on HH signal cross section scanned over the $\kappa_{\lambda}$ parameter while fixing the $\kappa_{2V}$ and $\kappa_{V}$ to their SM-predicted values.

Upper 95% CL limits on VHH signal cross section scanned over the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter while fixing the $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and $\kappa_{V}$ to their SM-predicted values.

Upper 95% CL limits on HH signal cross section scanned over the $\kappa_{2V}$ parameter while fixing the $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and $\kappa_{V}$ to their SM-predicted values.

Upper 95% CL limits on VHH signal cross section scanned over the $\kappa_{V}$ parameter while fixing the $\kappa_{2V}$ and $\kappa_{\lambda}$ to their SM-predicted values.

Upper 95% CL limits on HH signal cross section scanned over the $\kappa_{V}$ parameter while fixing the $\kappa_{2V}$ and $\kappa_{\lambda}$ to their SM-predicted values.

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the $p_T$ of the second-highest-$p_T$ jet

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the $|\eta|$ of the highest-$p_T$ jet

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the $|\eta|$ of the second-highest-$p_T$ jet

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the pseudorapidity difference between the two highest-$p_T$ jets in the event

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the two highest-$p_T$ jets in the event

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system, in the full $m_{4l}$ range

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 0 jet, in the on-shell ZZ region

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 1 jet, in the on-shell ZZ region

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 2 jets, in the on-shell ZZ region

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with at least 3 jets, in the on-shell ZZ region

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 0 jet, in the full $m_{4l}$ range

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 1 jet, in the full $m_{4l}$ range

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with 2 jets, in the full $m_{4l}$ range

Differential cross sections normalized to the fiducial cross section as a function of the invariant mass of the four-lepton system in events with at least 3 jets, in the full $m_{4l}$ range

C(k*)/(quadratic baseline) for K0s K+ and all kT, systematic uncertainties negligible for k*>0.06 GeV/c

C(k*)/(quadratic baseline) for K0s K+ and kT < 0.85 GeV/c, systematic uncertainties negligible for k*>0.06 GeV/c

C(k*)/(quadratic baseline) for K0s K+ and kT > 0.85 GeV/c, systematic uncertainties negligible for k*>0.06 GeV/c

C(k*)/(quadratic baseline) for K0s K- and all kT, systematic uncertainties negligible for k*>0.06 GeV/c

C(k*)/(quadratic baseline) for K0s K- and kT < 0.85 GeV/c, systematic uncertainties negligible for k*>0.06 GeV/c

C(k*)/(quadratic baseline) for K0s K- and kT > 0.85 GeV/c, systematic uncertainties negligible for k*>0.06 GeV/c

R vs. kT for 7 TeV pp averaged over K0s K+ and K0s K- with Achasov2 parameters

R vs. kT for 2.76 TeV/nucleon Pb Pb averaged over K0s K+ and K0s K- with Achasov2 parameters

lambda/purity vs. kT for 7 TeV pp averaged over K0s K+ and K0s K- with Achasov2 parameters

lambda/purity vs. kT for 2.76 TeV/nucleon Pb Pb averaged over K0s K+ and K0s K- with Achasov2 parameters

R vs. kT for 7 TeV pp averaged over K0s K+ and K0s K- and with Achasov2 parameters

R vs. kT for 7 TeV pp --> K0s K0s averaged over event multiplicity

R vs. kT for 7 TeV pp --> K+- K+- averaged over event multiplicity and averaged between K+ and K-

lambda/purity vs. kT for 7 TeV pp averaged over K0s K+ and K0s K- and with Achasov2 parameters

lambda/purity vs. kT for 7 TeV pp --> K0s K0s averaged over event multiplicity

lambda/purity vs. kT for 7 TeV pp --> K+- K+- averaged over event multiplicity and averaged between K+ and K-

x_J distribution of incluisve dijets in pp collisions

x_J distribution of b-quark dijets in pp collisions

x_J distribution of incluisve dijets in PbPb collisions (0-10%)

x_J distribution of b-quark dijets in PbPb collisions (0-10%)

x_J distribution of incluisve dijets in PbPb collisions (10-30%)

x_J distribution of b-quark dijets in PbPb collisions (10-30%)

x_J distribution of incluisve dijets in PbPb collisions (30-100%)

x_J distribution of b-quark dijets in PbPb collisions (30-100%)

Mean x_J of incluisve dijets in pp and PbPb collisions vs. number of participants

Mean x_J of b-quark dijets in pp and PbPb collisions vs. numberof participants

Mean x_J of inclusive jets and b-quark dijets in PbPb collisions minus mean x_J in pp collisions vs. numberof participants

Invariant mass distributions of the $t\to jj^{'}b$ candidates, $m_{top}$, in the 0 b category after all selections. The error bars indicate the statistical uncertainties.

Invariant mass distributions of the $t\to jj^{'}b$ candidates, $m_{top}$, in the 1 b category after all selections. The error bars indicate the statistical uncertainties.

Invariant mass distributions of the $t\to jj^{'}b$ candidates, $m_{top}$, in the $\geq$2 b category after all selections. The error bars indicate the statistical uncertainties.

The measured cross section in the $\mu$+jets, $\rm{e}$+jets and $\ell$+jets channels. The first uncertainty is the statistical, the second is the systematic.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 200 GeV Cu+Cu collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 200 GeV Cu+Cu collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 200 GeV Cu+Cu collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 200 GeV Cu+Cu collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 200 GeV Cu+Cu collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 200 GeV Cu+Cu collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 200 GeV Cu+Cu collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 62.4 GeV Cu+Cu collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 62.4 GeV Cu+Cu collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 62.4 GeV Cu+Cu collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 62.4 GeV Cu+Cu collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 62.4 GeV Cu+Cu collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 22.5 GeV Cu+Cu collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 22.5 GeV Cu+Cu collisions.

The uncorrected multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons with 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$ for 200 GeV $p$+$p$ collisions.

The mean from the NBD fit as a function of $N_{part}$ for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions over the range 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$.

The mean from the NBD fit as a function of $N_{part}$ for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions over the range 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$.

The mean from the NBD fit as a function of $N_{part}$ for 200 GeV Cu+Cu collisions over the range 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$.

The mean from the NBD fit as a function of $N_{part}$ for 62.4 GeV Cu+Cu collisions over the range 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$.

The mean from the NBD fit as a function of $N_{part}$ for 22.5 GeV Cu+Cu collisions over the range 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$.

Fluctuations expressed as the scaled variance as a function of centrality for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions in the range 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$.

Fluctuations expressed as the scaled variance as a function of $N_{part}$ for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions for 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$.

Fluctuations expressed as the scaled variance as a function of $N_{part}$ for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions for 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$.

Fluctuations expressed as the scaled variance as a function of $N_{part}$ for 200 GeV Cu+Cu collisions for 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$.

Fluctuations expressed as the scaled variance as a function of $N_{part}$ for 62.4 GeV Cu+Cu collisions for 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$.

Fluctuations expressed as the scaled variance as a function of $N_{part}$ for 22.5 GeV Cu+Cu collisions for 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$.

Scaled variance for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

Scaled variance for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

Scaled variance for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

Scaled variance for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

Scaled variance for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

Scaled variance for 200 GeV Cu+Cu collisions plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

Scaled variance for 200 GeV Cu+Cu collisions plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

Scaled variance for 200 GeV Cu+Cu collisions plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

Scaled variance for 62.4 GeV Cu+Cu collisions plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

Scaled variance for 62.4 GeV Cu+Cu collisions plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

The inverse of the parameter $k_{NBD}$ from the Negative Binomial Distribution fits for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions. The fluctuations are plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

The inverse of the parameter $k_{NBD}$ from the Negative Binomial Distribution fits for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions. The fluctuations are plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

The inverse of the parameter $k_{NBD}$ from the Negative Binomial Distribution fits for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions. The fluctuations are plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

The inverse of the parameter $k_{NBD}$ from the Negative Binomial Distribution fits for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions. The fluctuations are plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

The inverse of the parameter $k_{NBD}$ from the Negative Binomial Distribution fits for 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions. The fluctuations are plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

The inverse of the parameter $k_{NBD}$ from the Negative Binomial Distribution fits for 200 GeV Cu+Cu collisions. The fluctuations are plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

The inverse of the parameter $k_{NBD}$ from the Negative Binomial Distribution fits for 200 GeV Cu+Cu collisions. The fluctuations are plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

The inverse of the parameter $k_{NBD}$ from the Negative Binomial Distribution fits for 200 GeV Cu+Cu collisions. The fluctuations are plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

The inverse of the parameter $k_{NBD}$ from the Negative Binomial Distribution fits for 62.4 GeV Cu+Cu collisions. The fluctuations are plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

The inverse of the parameter $k_{NBD}$ from the Negative Binomial Distribution fits for 62.4 GeV Cu+Cu collisions. The fluctuations are plotted as a function of $N_{part}$ for several $p_T$ ranges.

The scaled variance as a funciton of $N_{part}$ for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions in the range 0.2 < $p_T$ < 2.0 GeV/$c$.

The observed distribution of the dijet invariant mass in the $\ell$+jets decay channel in the 0 b tagged jet category. The vertical bars on the data points represent the statistical uncertainties. The integral in the $\rm{e}$($\mu$)+jets channel (including overflow events) is 1375 (2406).

The observed distribution of the dijet invariant mass in the $\ell$+jets decay channel in the 1 b tagged jet category. The vertical bars on the data points represent the statistical uncertainties. The integral in the $\rm{e}$($\mu$)+jets channel (including overflow events) is 61 (129).

The observed distribution of the dijet invariant mass in the $\ell$+jets decay channel in the $\geq$2 b tagged jet category. The vertical bars on the data points represent the statistical uncertainties. The integral in the $\rm{e}$($\mu$)+jets channel (including overflow events) is 19 (33).

The observed distribution of the the minimum angular distance $\Delta R$ between all pairs of jets $j$ and $j'$ in the $\ell$+jets decay channel in the 0 b tagged jet category. The vertical bars on the data points represent the statistical uncertainties. The integral in the $\rm{e}$($\mu$)+jets channel (including overflow events) is 1375 (2406).

The observed distribution of the the minimum angular distance $\Delta R$ between all pairs of jets $j$ and $j'$ in the $\ell$+jets decay channel in the 1 b tagged jet category. The vertical bars on the data points represent the statistical uncertainties. The integral in the $\rm{e}$($\mu$)+jets channel (including overflow events) is 61 (129).

The observed distribution of the the minimum angular distance $\Delta R$ between all pairs of jets $j$ and $j'$ in the $\ell$+jets decay channel in the $\geq$2 b tagged jet category. The vertical bars on the data points represent the statistical uncertainties. The integral in the $\rm{e}$($\mu$)+jets channel (including overflow events) is 19 (33).

The observed distribution of the jet multiplicity in the $\rm{e}^\pm \mu^\mp$ decay channel for events passing the dilepton criteria. The error bars indicate the statistical uncertainties. The last bin of the distributions contains the overflow events.

The observed distribution of the scalar $p_{\rm{T}}$ sum of all jets in the $\rm{e}^\pm \mu^\mp$ decay channel for events passing the dilepton criteria. The error bars indicate the statistical uncertainties. The last bin of the distributions contains the overflow events.

The observed distribution of the invariant mass of the lepton pair in the $\rm{e}^\pm \mu^\mp$ decay channel after requiring at least two jets. The error bars indicate the statistical uncertainties. The integral is 24. The last bin of the distributions contains the overflow events.

The observed distribution of the $p_{\rm{T}}$ of the lepton pair in the $\rm{e}^\pm \mu^\mp$ decay channel after requiring at least two jets. The error bars indicate the statistical uncertainties. The integral is 24. The last bin of the distributions contains the overflow events.

The observed distribution of the $p_{\rm{T}}^{\rm{miss}}$ in the $\mu^\pm \mu^\mp$ decay channel for events passing the dilepton criteria and Z boson veto. The error bars indicate the statistical uncertainties. The last bin of the distributions contains the overflow events.

The observed distribution of the invariant mass of the lepton pair in the $\mu^\pm \mu^\mp$ decay channel for events passing the dilepton criteria, Z boson veto, and $p_{\rm{T}}^{\rm{miss}}>35$ GeV requirement. The error bars indicate the statistical uncertainties. The last bin of the distributions contains the overflow events.

Non-prompt J/$\psi$ cross section as a function of transverse momentum in pp at 5.02 TeV

Prompt J/$\psi$ cross section as a function of transverse momentum in pp at 13 TeV

Prompt J/$\psi$ cross section as a function of transverse momentum in pp at 5.02 TeV

Prompt J/$\psi$ cross section as a function of rapidity in pp at 13 TeV

Cross section ratio AU/C measured with the 1.6 T mode. Errors include statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Cross section ratios for the 1.3 T mode. Error bars include statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Cross section ratios for the 1.6 T mode. Error bars include statistical and systematic uncertainties.

Double differential cross section for P DEUT --> K+ X measured with the 1.45 T mode. Additional overall systematic error of 20 PCT from the determination of the luminosity.

Double differential cross section for P DEUT --> K+ X measured with the 1.6 T mode. Additional overall systematic error of 20 PCT from the determination of the luminosity.

Inclusive SIGMA(1660) production cross sections, times the < LAMBDA PI> branching ratio, in the XL range 0.3 to 1.0 for the SIGMA- beam on the Copper target.

Inclusive SIGMA(1660) production cross sections, times the < LAMBDA PI> branching ratio, in the XL range 0.3 to 1.0 for the SIGMA- beam on the Carbon target.

Inclusive SIGMA(1660) production cross sections per nucleon, times the < LAMBDA PI> branching ratio, in the XL range 0.3 to 1.0 for the SIGMA- beam on the Carbon target, and the exponent in the cross section parametrization of the formA**POWER.

Inclusive SIGMA(1385) production cross sections for the PI- beam with a Copper target, times the < LAMBDA PI> branching ratio., RE = PI- CU --> SIGMA(1385)- X. PI- CU --> SIGMA(1385)+ X.

Inclusive SIGMA(1385) production cross sections for the PI- beam with a Carbon target, times the < LAMBDA PI> branching ratio., RE = PI- C --> SIGMA(1385)-X. PI- C --> SIGMA(1385)+ X.

Inclusive SIGMA(1385) production cross sections per nucleon, times the < LAMBDA PI> branching ratio, for the PI- beam, and the exponent in the cross section parametrization of the form A**POWER.

Inclusive SIGMA(1385) production cross sections for the Neutron beam with aCopper target, times the < LAMBDA PI> branching ratio.

Inclusive SIGMA(1385) production cross sections for the Neutron beam with aCarbon target, times the < LAMBDA PI> branching ratio.

Inclusive SIGMA(1385) production cross sections per nucleon, times the < LAMBDA PI> branching ratio, for the Neutron beam, and the exponent in the cross section parametrization of the form A**POWER.

Differential cross sections as a function of XL for SIGMA+- production in CU and C with the SIGMA- beam.

Differential cross sections as a function of PT**2 for SIGMA+- production in CU and C with the SIGMA- beam.

Differential cross sections as a function of XL for SIGMA(1385)- productionin CU and C with the PI- and SIGMA- beams.

Differential cross sections as a function of XL for SIGMA(1385)- productionin CU and C with the Neutron beam.

Differential cross sections as a function of PT**2 for SIGMA(1385)- production in CU and C with the PI- and SIGMA- beams.

Differential cross sections as a function of PT**2 for SIGMA(1385)- production in CU and C with the Neutron beam.

Differential cross sections as a function of XL for SIGMA(1385)+ productionin CU and C with the PI- and SIGMA- beams.

Differential cross sections as a function of XL for SIGMA(1385)+ productionin CU and C with the Neutron beam.

Differential cross sections as a function of PT**2 for SIGMA(1385)+ production in CU and C with the PI- and SIGMA- beams.

Differential cross sections as a function of PT**2 for SIGMA(1385)+ production in CU and C with the Neutron beam.

Differential cross sections as a function of XL for SIGMABAR(1385)- production in CU and C with the SIGMA- beam.

Differential cross sections as a function of PT**2 for SIGMABAR(1385)- production in CU and C with the SIGMA- beam.

Differential cross sections as a function of XL for SIGMA(1660)+- production in CU and C with the SIGMA- beam.

Differential cross sections as a function of PT**2 for SIGMA(1660)+- production in CU and C with the SIGMA- beam.

The differential cross sections for K*- production as a function of XL.

The differential cross sections for K*+ production as a function of XL.

Differential production cross sections for K*- as a function of PT**2.

Differential production cross sections for K*+ as a function of PT**2.

Differential cross sections for K*- AND K*+ production from a neutron beam as a function of PT**2.

No description provided.

No description provided.

Data from Figure 3b on charged pion production. Data correspond to charged particle production, corrected to the contribution from (PI+ + PI-)/2.

Data from Figure 3b on charged pion production. Data correspond to charged particle production, corrected to the contribution from (PI+ + PI-)/2.

Data from Figure 3c on charged pion production. Data correspond to charged particle production, corrected to the contribution from (PI+ + PI-)/2.

Data from Figure 3d on charged pion production. Data correspond to charged particle production, corrected to the contribution from (PI+ + PI-)/2.

Data from Figure 4a on forward jet production differential in x, low PT

Data from Figure 4a on forward jet production differential in x, high PT

Data from Figure 5a on forward jet production differential in delta(phi), low x

Data from Figure 5b on forward jet production differential in delta(phi), high x

The reduced cross section at Q**2 = 60 GeV**2 for centre-of-mass energy 318.

The reduced cross section at Q**2 = 80 GeV**2 for centre-of-mass energy 318.

The reduced cross section at Q**2 = 110 GeV**2 for centre-of-mass energy 318.

The reduced cross section at Q**2 = 24 GeV**2 for centre-of-mass energy 251.

The reduced cross section at Q**2 = 32 GeV**2 for centre-of-mass energy 251.

The reduced cross section at Q**2 = 45 GeV**2 for centre-of-mass energy 251.

The reduced cross section at Q**2 = 60 GeV**2 for centre-of-mass energy 251.

The reduced cross section at Q**2 = 80 GeV**2 for centre-of-mass energy 251.

The reduced cross section at Q**2 = 110 GeV**2 for centre-of-mass energy 251.

The reduced cross section at Q**2 = 24 GeV**2 for centre-of-mass energy 225.

The reduced cross section at Q**2 = 32 GeV**2 for centre-of-mass energy 225.

The reduced cross section at Q**2 = 45 GeV**2 for centre-of-mass energy 225.

The reduced cross section at Q**2 = 60 GeV**2 for centre-of-mass energy 225.

The reduced cross section at Q**2 = 80 GeV**2 for centre-of-mass energy 225.

The reduced cross section at Q**2 = 110 GeV**2 for centre-of-mass energy 225.

FL and F2 at Q**2 = 24 GeV**2 with no constraints on FL or F2.

FL and F2 at Q**2 = 32 GeV**2 with no constraints on FL or F2.

FL and F2 at Q**2 = 45 GeV**2 with no constraints on FL or F2.

FL and F2 at Q**2 = 60 GeV**2 with no constraints on FL or F2.

FL and F2 at Q**2 = 80 GeV**2 with no constraints on FL or F2.

FL and F2 at Q**2 = 110 GeV**2 with no constraints on FL or F2.

FL and F2 with the additional constraints that F2 >= 0 and 0 <= FL <= F2.

FL and F2 with the additional constraints that F2 >= 0 and 0 <= FL <= F2.

FL and F2 with the additional constraints that F2 >= 0 and 0 <= FL <= F2.

FL and F2 with the additional constraints that F2 >= 0 and 0 <= FL <= F2.

FL and F2 with the additional constraints that F2 >= 0 and 0 <= FL <= F2.

FL and F2 with the additional constraints that F2 >= 0 and 0 <= FL <= F2.

FL and R as a function of Q**2 with no constraints on F2 or FL. The quantites are quoted such that Q**2/X is constant for each value which correspinds to Y = 0.71 at Ecm=225 GeV.

FL and R as a function of Q**2 with the additional constraints that F2 >= 0 and 0 <= FL <= F2. The quantites are quoted such that Q**2/X is constant for each value which correspinds to Y = 0.71 at Ecm=225 GeV.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 24 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 318.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 32 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 318.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 45 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 318.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 60 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 318.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 80 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 318.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 110 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 318.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 24 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 251.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 32 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 251.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 45 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 251.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 60 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 251.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 80 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 251.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 110 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 251.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 24 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 225.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 32 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 225.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 45 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 225.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 60 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 225.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 80 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 225.

Percentage contributions of the various sources of systematic error for Q**2 = 110 GeV**2 for centrof-mass energy 225.

Measured cross section for the process E+ E- --> QUARK QUARKBAR TAU NEUTRINO.

Measured cross section for the process E+ E- --> QUARK QUARKBAR QUARK QUARKBAR.

Measured value of the QUARK QUARKBAR cross section.

Measured values of the cross section for W+ W- production into the fully leptonic decay mode summed over all lepton modes and assuming charged lepton universality.

Measured values of the cross section for W+ W- production into semi leptonic decay mode summed over all lepton flavours and assuming charged lepton universality.

Measured values of the cross section for W+ W- production in the fully hadronic decay mode.

The measured values of the E+ E- --> W+ W- cross section summed over all decay modes.

Angular distributions of the W+ W- cross sections resulting from the sum of the (QUARK QUARKBAR ELECTRON NEUTRINO) and the (QUARK QUARKBAR MUON NEUTRINO) cross sections.

Cross sections as a function of W for the lower Q**2, Z pole, data.

Cross sections as a function of W for the high Q**2 data.

Cross sections for the two photon RHO0 RHO0 and non-resonance data for the lower Q**2, Z pole, data.

Cross sections for the two photon RHO0 RHO0 and non-resonance data for the higher Q**2 data.

flow background with default flow Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 1

flow background with default flow Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 2

flow background with default flow Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 3

flow background with default flow Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 4

flow background with default flow Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 5

flow background with default flow Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 0

flow background with default flow Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1

flow background with default flow Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2

flow background with default flow Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3

flow background with default flow Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4

flow background with default flow Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5

flow background with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 0

flow background with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 1

flow background with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 2

flow background with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 3

flow background with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 4

flow background with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 5

flow background with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 0

flow background with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1

flow background with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2

flow background with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3

flow background with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4

flow background with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5

flow background with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 0

flow background with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 1

flow background with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 2

flow background with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 3

flow background with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 4

flow background with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 5

flow background with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 0

flow background with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1

flow background with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2

flow background with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3

flow background with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4

flow background with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5

raw correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 0

raw correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 1

raw correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 2

raw correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 3

raw correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 4

raw correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 5

raw correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 0

raw correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1

raw correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2

raw correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3

raw correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4

raw correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5

dN/deta phis=045 deg, pt=0.151 GeV/c

dN/deta phis=045 deg, pt=0.153 GeV/c

dN/deta phis=090 deg, pt=0.51 GeV/c

dN/deta phis=090 deg, pt=12 GeV/c

dN/deta phis=4590 deg, pt=0.151 GeV/c

sigma vs phis pt=0.151 GeV/c

sigma vs phis pt=0.153 GeV/c

sigma vs phis pt=0.51 GeV/c

sigma vs phis pt=12 GeV/c

sigma vs pt phis=045 deg

sigma vs pt phis=090 deg

sigma vs pt phis=4590 deg

background uncertainty caps in the figure

flow uncertainty curves in the figure

leadage uncertainty arrows in the figure

total uncertainty boxes in the figure

background normalization systematic uncertainty band Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 0

background normalization systematic uncertainty band Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 1

background normalization systematic uncertainty band Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 2

background normalization systematic uncertainty band Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 3

background normalization systematic uncertainty band Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 4

background normalization systematic uncertainty band Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 5

background normalization systematic uncertainty band Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 0

background normalization systematic uncertainty band Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1

background normalization systematic uncertainty band Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2

background normalization systematic uncertainty band Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3

background normalization systematic uncertainty band Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4

background normalization systematic uncertainty band Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5

d+Au background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c

d+Au background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

0^{o} < phi_{s} < 45^{o}

45^{o} < phi_{s} < 90^{o}

Previous in-plane result published in 2004

Previous out-of-plane result published in 2004

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, 0^{o} < phi_{s} < 45^{o}

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, 45^{o} < phi_{s} < 90^{o}

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<3 GeV/c, 0^{o} < phi_{s} < 45^{o}

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<3 GeV/c, 45^{o} < phi_{s} < 90^{o}

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, 0^{o} < phi_{s} < 45^{o}

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, 45^{o} < phi_{s} < 90^{o}

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<3 GeV/c, 0^{o} < phi_{s} < 45^{o}

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<3 GeV/c, 45^{o} < phi_{s} < 90^{o}

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 0^{o}15^{o}

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 75^{o}90^{o}

Cone region, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

one region, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

one region, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

one region, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

i region, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

Pi region, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

i region, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

i region, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

d+Au, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c

20-60%, 3<p_{T}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, (a) 0^{o}<#phi_{s}<15^{o}

20-60%, 3<p_{T}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, (b) 75^{o}<#phi_{s}<90^{o}

20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, (a) 0^{o}<phi_{s}<15^{o}

20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, (b) 75^{o}<phi_{s}<90^{o}

20-60% Au+Au, 3<p_{T}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{T}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 0, jet

20-60% Au+Au, 3<p_{T}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{T}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1, jet

20-60% Au+Au, 3<p_{T}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{T}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2, jet

20-60% Au+Au, 3<p_{T}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{T}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3, jet

20-60% Au+Au, 3<p_{T}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{T}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4, jet

20-60% Au+Au, 3<p_{T}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{T}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5, jet

1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, jet

0-60% Au+Au, 3<p_{T}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{T}^{(a)}<2 GeV/, slice 0, ridge

20-60% Au+Au, 3<p_{T}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{T}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1, ridge

20-60% Au+Au, 3<p_{T}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{T}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2, ridge

20-60% Au+Au, 3<p_{T}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{T}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3, ridge

20-60% Au+Au, 3<p_{T}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{T}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4, ridge

20-60% Au+Au, 3<p_{T}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{T}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5, ridge

1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, ridge

jet (Deltaphi|<1.0, |Deltaeta|<0.7) 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

jet (Deltaphi|<1.0, |Deltaeta|<0.7) 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

ridge (Deltaphi|<1.0, |Deltaeta|>0.7) 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

ridge (Deltaphi|<1.0, |Deltaeta|>0.7) 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

ridge (Deltaphi|<1.0, |Deltaeta|>0.7) 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

ridge (Deltaphi|<1.0, |Deltaeta|>0.7) 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c Ridge (75^{o}<|phi_{s}|<90^{o}) / Ridge (0^{o}<|phi_{s}|<15^{o})

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c Ridge (75^{o}<|phi_{s}|<90^{o}) / Ridge (0^{o}<|phi_{s}|<15^{o})

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c Ridge (30^{o}<|phi_{s}|<45^{o}) / Ridge (0^{o}<|phi_{s}|<15^{o})

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c Ridge (30^{o}<|phi_{s}|<45^{o}) / Ridge (0^{o}<|phi_{s}|<15^{o})

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c Ridge (0^{o}<|phi_{s}|<15^{o}) / Jet (0^{o}<|phi_{s}|<15^{o})

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c Ridge (0^{o}<|phi_{s}|<15^{o}) / Jet (0^{o}<|phi_{s}|<15^{o})

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, cone region

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, cone region

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, jetlike

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, jetlike

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, pi region

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, pi region

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, ridge

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, ridge

fig17_ampl_pt_inclusive

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 0^{o}<phi_{s}<45^{o}, cone region

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 0^{o}<phi_{s}<45^{o}, jetlike

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 0^{o}<phi_{s}<45^{o}, pi region

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 0^{o}<phi_{s}<45^{o}, pi region ridge

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 0^{o}<phi_{s}<45^{o}, ridge

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 45^{o}<phi_{s}<90^{o}, cone region

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 45^{o}<phi_{s}<90^{o}, jetlike

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 45^{o}<phi_{s}<90^{o}, pi region

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 45^{o}<phi_{s}<90^{o}, pi region ridge

3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 45^{o}<phi_{s}<90^{o}, ridge

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 0^{o}<phi_{s}<45^{o}, cone region

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 0^{o}<phi_{s}<45^{o}, jetlike

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 0^{o}<phi_{s}<45^{o}, pi region

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 0^{o}<phi_{s}<45^{o}, pi region ridge

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 0^{o}<phi_{s}<45^{o}, ridge

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 45^{o}<phi_{s}<90^{o}, cone region

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 45^{o}<phi_{s}<90^{o}, jetlike

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 45^{o}<phi_{s}<90^{o}, pi region

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 45^{o}<phi_{s}<90^{o}, pi region ridge

4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 45^{o}<phi_{s}<90^{o}, ridge

jetlike eta sigma

cone peak phi sigma

jetlike phi sigma

ridge phi sigma

jetlike eta sigma

cone peak phi sigma

jetlike phi sigma

ridge phi sigma

dAu jetlike eta sigma

dAu jetlike phi sigma

cone peak centroid

cone peak centroid

cone peak centroid

cone peak centroid

cone peak centroid

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5

d+Au background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c

d+Au background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5

d+Au background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c

d+Au background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c

v_{2} /3

v_{3}

v_{4}

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation with upper flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 2

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 3

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 4

background subtracted correlation with lower flow systematic uncertainty Au+Au 20-60%, 3<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<4 GeV/c, 1<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<2 GeV/c, slice 5

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 0

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 1

background subtracted correlation Au+Au 20-60%, 4<p_{\text{T}}^{(t)}<6 GeV/c, 2<p_{\text{T}}^{(a)}<4 GeV/c, slice 2