Showing 10 of 189 results
This paper presents a search for dark matter, $\chi$, using events with a single top quark and an energetic $W$ boson. The analysis is based on proton-proton collision data collected with the ATLAS experiment at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV during LHC Run 2 (2015-2018), corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The search considers final states with zero or one charged lepton (electron or muon), at least one $b$-jet and large missing transverse momentum. In addition, a result from a previous search considering two-charged-lepton final states is included in the interpretation of the results. The data are found to be in good agreement with the Standard Model predictions and the results are interpreted in terms of 95% confidence-level exclusion limits in the context of a class of dark matter models involving an extended two-Higgs-doublet sector together with a pseudoscalar mediator particle. The search is particularly sensitive to on-shell production of the charged Higgs boson state, $H^{\pm}$, arising from the two-Higgs-doublet mixing, and its semi-invisible decays via the mediator particle, $a$: $H^{\pm} \rightarrow W^\pm a (\rightarrow \chi\chi)$. Signal models with $H^{\pm}$ masses up to 1.5 TeV and $a$ masses up to 350 GeV are excluded assuming a tan$\beta$ value of 1. For masses of $a$ of 150 (250) GeV, tan$\beta$ values up to 2 are excluded for $H^{\pm}$ masses between 200 (400) GeV and 1.5 TeV. Signals with tan$\beta$ values between 20 and 30 are excluded for $H^{\pm}$ masses between 500 and 800 GeV.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 0L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 1L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_a$ vs. $m_{H^{\pm}}$ and assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 150 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The observed exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
The expected exclusion contour at 95% CL as a function of the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ and assuming $m_a$ = 250 $\mathrm{GeV}$, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Masses that are within the contours are excluded. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered in this contour. These exclusion contours are derived using the 2L channel only.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.7$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Only signals simulating the tW+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_a$ vs. $ m_{H^{\pm}}$ signal grid assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 150 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
Model dependent upper limit on the cross section for the $m_{H^{\pm}}$ vs. tan$\beta$ signal grid assuming $m_a$ = 250 GeV, $m_{\mathrm{DM}} = 10 \mathrm{GeV}$, $g_{\chi} = 1$ and sin$\theta = 0.35$. Signals simulating the tW+DM + tt+DM final states are considered. Upper limits with large $\mu_{\mathrm{sig}}$ for the observed limit are capped at 500.
The distributions of $m_{\mathrm{b1},\mathrm{W-tagged}}$ in the 0L inclusive signal region. For each bin yields for the data and total SM prediction are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the total uncertainty, including the MC statistical uncertainty, detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.
The distributions of $m_{\mathrm{T}}^{\mathrm{b,E_{\mathrm{T}^{\mathrm{miss}}}}}$ in the 0L inclusive signal region. For each bin yields for the data and total SM prediction are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the total uncertainty, including the MC statistical uncertainty, detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.
The distributions of $N_{\mathrm{W-tagged}}$ in the 0L inclusive signal region. For each bin yields for the data and total SM prediction are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the total uncertainty, including the MC statistical uncertainty, detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.
The distributions of $m_{\mathrm{b1},\mathrm{\cancel{b1}}}$ in the hadronic top inclusive signal region. For each bin yields for the data and total SM prediction are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the total uncertainty, including the MC statistical uncertainty, detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.
The distributions of $m_{\mathrm{b1},\mathrm{\cancel{b1}}}$ in the leptonic top inclusive signal region. For each bin yields for the data and total SM prediction are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the total uncertainty, including the MC statistical uncertainty, detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.
The distributions of $m_{\mathrm{b1},\mathrm{\cancel{b1}}}$ in the leptonic top inclusive signal region. For each bin yields for the data and total SM prediction are provided. The SM prediction is provided with the total uncertainty, including the MC statistical uncertainty, detector-related systematic uncertainties and theoretical uncertainties. The rightmost bin includes overflow events.
Cutflow for the reference point $(\it{m}_{\mathrm{H^{\pm}}}, \it{m}_{a}, tan\beta, sin\theta )=$ (500,100,1,0.7) , (800,150,20,0.7), (600,250,30,0.7), (1000,400,1,0.7) in 0L regions. Results are shown including all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 139 fb$^{-1}$.
Cutflow for the reference point $(\it{m}_{\mathrm{H^{\pm}}}, \it{m}_{a}, tan\beta, sin\theta )=$ (500,100,1,0.7) , (800,150,20,0.7), (600,250,30,0.7), (1000,400,1,0.7) in 1L leptonic top regions. Results are shown including all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 139 fb$^{-1}$.
Cutflow for the reference point $(\it{m}_{\mathrm{H^{\pm}}}, \it{m}_{a}, tan\beta, sin\theta )=$ (500,100,1,0.7) , (800,150,20,0.7), (600,250,30,0.7), (1000,400,1,0.7) in 1L hadronic top regions. Results are shown including all correction factors applied to simulation, and is normalised to 139 fb$^{-1}$.
Signal acceptance in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_a$--m$_{H^{\pm}}$ assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_a$--m$_{H^{\pm}}$ assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 150 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 150 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 250 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 250 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_a$--m$_{H^{\pm}}$ assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_a$--m$_{H^{\pm}}$ assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 150 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 150 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 250 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 250 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.7. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_a$--m$_{H^{\pm}}$ assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_a$--m$_{H^{\pm}}$ assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 150 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 150 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 250 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 0L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 250 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_a$--m$_{H^{\pm}}$ assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_a$--m$_{H^{\pm}}$ assuming tan$\beta$ = 1, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 150 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 150 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Signal acceptance in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 250 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the acceptance given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{3}$
Signal efficiency in the 1L region for 2HDM+a model DM signals on the plane defined by m$_{H^{\pm}}$--tan$\beta$ assuming m$_a$ = 250 GeV, m$_{\chi}$= 10 GeV and sin$\theta$ = 0.35. Please mind that the efficiency given in the table is multiplied by factor of $10^{2}$
Searches are performed for nonresonant and resonant di-Higgs boson production in the $b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$ final state. The data set used corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV recorded by the ATLAS detector at the CERN Large Hadron Collider. No excess above the expected background is found and upper limits on the di-Higgs boson production cross sections are set. A 95% confidence-level upper limit of 4.2 times the cross section predicted by the Standard Model is set on $pp \rightarrow HH$ nonresonant production, where the expected limit is 5.7 times the Standard Model predicted value. The expected constraints are obtained for a background hypothesis excluding $pp \rightarrow HH$ production. The observed (expected) constraints on the Higgs boson trilinear coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}$ are determined to be $[-1.5, 6.7]$ $([-2.4, 7.7])$ at 95% confidence level, where the expected constraints on $\kappa_{\lambda}$ are obtained excluding $pp \rightarrow HH$ production from the background hypothesis. For resonant production of a new hypothetical scalar particle $X$ ($X \rightarrow HH \rightarrow b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma$), limits on the cross section for $pp \to X \to HH$ are presented in the narrow-width approximation as a function of $m_{X}$ in the range $251 \leq m_{X} \leq 1000$ GeV. The observed (expected) limits on the cross section for $pp \to X \to HH$ range from 640 fb to 44 fb (391 fb to 46 fb) over the considered mass range.
The BDT distribution of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the low mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} < 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.881 in the low mass region are discarded.
The BDT distribution of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the low mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} < 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.881 in the low mass region are discarded.
The BDT distribution of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the low mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} < 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.881 in the low mass region are discarded.
The BDT distribution of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the low mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} < 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.881 in the low mass region are discarded.
The BDT distribution (with x-axis zoomed in) of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the low mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} < 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.881 in the low mass region are discarded. The range of BDT scores is from 0.8 to 1.
The BDT distribution (with x-axis zoomed in) of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the low mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} < 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.881 in the low mass region are discarded. The range of BDT scores is from 0.8 to 1.
The BDT distribution (with x-axis zoomed in) of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the low mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} < 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.881 in the low mass region are discarded. The range of BDT scores is from 0.8 to 1.
The BDT distribution (with x-axis zoomed in) of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the low mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} < 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.881 in the low mass region are discarded. The range of BDT scores is from 0.8 to 1.
The BDT distribution of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the high mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} > 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.857 in the high mass region are discarded.
The BDT distribution of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the high mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} > 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.857 in the high mass region are discarded.
The BDT distribution of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the high mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} > 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.857 in the high mass region are discarded.
The BDT distribution of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the high mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} > 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.857 in the high mass region are discarded.
The BDT distribution (with x-axis zoomed in) of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the high mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} > 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.857 in the high mass region are discarded. The range of BDT scores is from 0.8 to 1.
The BDT distribution (with x-axis zoomed in) of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the high mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} > 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.857 in the high mass region are discarded. The range of BDT scores is from 0.8 to 1.
The BDT distribution (with x-axis zoomed in) of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the high mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} > 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.857 in the high mass region are discarded. The range of BDT scores is from 0.8 to 1.
The BDT distribution (with x-axis zoomed in) of the di-Higgs ggF signal for two different values of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ and the main backgrounds in the high mass region ($m^{*}_{b\bar{b}\gamma\gamma} > 350$ GeV). Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted lines denote the category boundaries. Events with a BDT score below 0.857 in the high mass region are discarded. The range of BDT scores is from 0.8 to 1.
The $BDT_{tot}$ score for the benchmark signal $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV and for the main backgrounds. Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted line denotes the event selection threshold. Events with a $BDT_{tot}$ score below 0.85 for $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV are discarded.
The $BDT_{tot}$ score for the benchmark signal $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV and for the main backgrounds. Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted line denotes the event selection threshold. Events with a $BDT_{tot}$ score below 0.85 for $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV are discarded.
The $BDT_{tot}$ score for the benchmark signal $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV and for the main backgrounds. Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted line denotes the event selection threshold. Events with a $BDT_{tot}$ score below 0.85 for $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV are discarded.
The $BDT_{tot}$ score for the benchmark signal $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV and for the main backgrounds. Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted line denotes the event selection threshold. Events with a $BDT_{tot}$ score below 0.85 for $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV are discarded.
The $BDT_{tot}$ score for the benchmark signal $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV and for the main backgrounds. Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted line denotes the event selection threshold. Events with a $BDT_{tot}$ score below 0.75 for $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV are discarded.
The $BDT_{tot}$ score for the benchmark signal $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV and for the main backgrounds. Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted line denotes the event selection threshold. Events with a $BDT_{tot}$ score below 0.75 for $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV are discarded.
The $BDT_{tot}$ score for the benchmark signal $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV and for the main backgrounds. Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted line denotes the event selection threshold. Events with a $BDT_{tot}$ score below 0.75 for $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV are discarded.
The $BDT_{tot}$ score for the benchmark signal $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV and for the main backgrounds. Distributions are normalized to unit area. The dotted line denotes the event selection threshold. Events with a $BDT_{tot}$ score below 0.75 for $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV are discarded.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in high mass BDT tight category for the nonresonant $HH$ search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in high mass BDT tight category for the nonresonant $HH$ search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in high mass BDT tight category for the nonresonant $HH$ search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in high mass BDT tight category for the nonresonant $HH$ search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in high mass BDT loose category for the nonresonant $HH$ search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in high mass BDT loose category for the nonresonant $HH$ search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in high mass BDT loose category for the nonresonant $HH$ search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in high mass BDT loose category for the nonresonant $HH$ search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in low mass BDT tight category for the nonresonant $HH$ search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in low mass BDT tight category for the nonresonant $HH$ search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in low mass BDT tight category for the nonresonant $HH$ search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in low mass BDT tight category for the nonresonant $HH$ search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in low mass BDT loose category for the nonresonant $HH$ search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in low mass BDT loose category for the nonresonant $HH$ search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in low mass BDT loose category for the nonresonant $HH$ search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ in low mass BDT loose category for the nonresonant $HH$ search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ for the selections used for the resonance mass point $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV for the resonant search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband. The scalar resonance signal is scaled to a total production cross section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow X \rightarrow HH)$ = 370 fb.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ for the selections used for the resonance mass point $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV for the resonant search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband. The scalar resonance signal is scaled to a total production cross section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow X \rightarrow HH)$ = 370 fb.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ for the selections used for the resonance mass point $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV for the resonant search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband. The scalar resonance signal is scaled to a total production cross section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow X \rightarrow HH)$ = 370 fb.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ for the selections used for the resonance mass point $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV for the resonant search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband. The scalar resonance signal is scaled to a total production cross section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow X \rightarrow HH)$ = 370 fb.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ for the selections used for the resonance mass point $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV for the resonant search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband. The scalar resonance signal is scaled to a total production cross section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow X \rightarrow HH)$ = 67 fb.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ for the selections used for the resonance mass point $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV for the resonant search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband. The scalar resonance signal is scaled to a total production cross section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow X \rightarrow HH)$ = 67 fb.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ for the selections used for the resonance mass point $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV for the resonant search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband. The scalar resonance signal is scaled to a total production cross section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow X \rightarrow HH)$ = 67 fb.
Distributions of $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ for the selections used for the resonance mass point $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV for the resonant search. The data-derived fractions of nonresonant $\gamma\gamma$, $\gamma$-jet or jet-$\gamma$, and dijet background are applied and the total background is normalized to the data sideband. The scalar resonance signal is scaled to a total production cross section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow X \rightarrow HH)$ = 67 fb.
The number of data events observed in the 120 GeV < $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ < 130 GeV window, the number of $HH$ signal events expected for $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = 1 and for $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = 10, and events expected for single Higgs boson production (estimated using MC simulation), as well as for continuum background. For the single Higgs boson, Rest includes VBF, $WH$, $tHqb$, and $tHW$. The values are obtained from a fit of the Asimov data set generated under the SM signal-plus-background hypothesis, $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = 1. The continuum background component of the Asimov data set is obtained from the fit of the data sideband. The uncertainties in $HH$ signals and single Higgs boson background include the systematic uncertainties discussed in Section 6. The uncertainty in the continuum background is given by the sum in quadrature of the statistical uncertainty from the fit to the data and the spurious-signal uncertainty.
The number of data events observed in the 120 GeV < $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ < 130 GeV window, the number of $HH$ signal events expected for $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = 1 and for $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = 10, and events expected for single Higgs boson production (estimated using MC simulation), as well as for continuum background. For the single Higgs boson, Rest includes VBF, $WH$, $tHqb$, and $tHW$. The values are obtained from a fit of the Asimov data set generated under the SM signal-plus-background hypothesis, $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = 1. The continuum background component of the Asimov data set is obtained from the fit of the data sideband. The uncertainties in $HH$ signals and single Higgs boson background include the systematic uncertainties discussed in Section 6. The uncertainty in the continuum background is given by the sum in quadrature of the statistical uncertainty from the fit to the data and the spurious-signal uncertainty.
The number of data events observed in the 120 GeV < $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ < 130 GeV window, the number of $HH$ signal events expected for $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = 1 and for $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = 10, and events expected for single Higgs boson production (estimated using MC simulation), as well as for continuum background. For the single Higgs boson, Rest includes VBF, $WH$, $tHqb$, and $tHW$. The values are obtained from a fit of the Asimov data set generated under the SM signal-plus-background hypothesis, $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = 1. The continuum background component of the Asimov data set is obtained from the fit of the data sideband. The uncertainties in $HH$ signals and single Higgs boson background include the systematic uncertainties discussed in Section 6. The uncertainty in the continuum background is given by the sum in quadrature of the statistical uncertainty from the fit to the data and the spurious-signal uncertainty.
The number of data events observed in the 120 GeV < $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ < 130 GeV window, the number of $HH$ signal events expected for $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = 1 and for $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = 10, and events expected for single Higgs boson production (estimated using MC simulation), as well as for continuum background. For the single Higgs boson, Rest includes VBF, $WH$, $tHqb$, and $tHW$. The values are obtained from a fit of the Asimov data set generated under the SM signal-plus-background hypothesis, $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = 1. The continuum background component of the Asimov data set is obtained from the fit of the data sideband. The uncertainties in $HH$ signals and single Higgs boson background include the systematic uncertainties discussed in Section 6. The uncertainty in the continuum background is given by the sum in quadrature of the statistical uncertainty from the fit to the data and the spurious-signal uncertainty.
Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the cross section of nonresonant Higgs boson pair production as a function of the Higgs boson self-coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}= \lambda_{HHH}/\lambda^{\textrm{SM}}_{HHH}$. The expected constraints on $\kappa_{\lambda}$ are obtained with a background hypothesis excluding $pp \rightarrow HH$ production. The $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ variations about the expected limit due to statistical and systematic uncertainties are also shown. The theory prediction curve represents the scenario where all parameters and couplings are set to their SM values except for $\kappa_{\lambda}$. The uncertainty band of the theory prediction curve shows the cross-section uncertainty.
Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the cross section of nonresonant Higgs boson pair production as a function of the Higgs boson self-coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}= \lambda_{HHH}/\lambda^{\textrm{SM}}_{HHH}$. The expected constraints on $\kappa_{\lambda}$ are obtained with a background hypothesis excluding $pp \rightarrow HH$ production. The $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ variations about the expected limit due to statistical and systematic uncertainties are also shown. The theory prediction curve represents the scenario where all parameters and couplings are set to their SM values except for $\kappa_{\lambda}$. The uncertainty band of the theory prediction curve shows the cross-section uncertainty.
Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the cross section of nonresonant Higgs boson pair production as a function of the Higgs boson self-coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}= \lambda_{HHH}/\lambda^{\textrm{SM}}_{HHH}$. The expected constraints on $\kappa_{\lambda}$ are obtained with a background hypothesis excluding $pp \rightarrow HH$ production. The $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ variations about the expected limit due to statistical and systematic uncertainties are also shown. The theory prediction curve represents the scenario where all parameters and couplings are set to their SM values except for $\kappa_{\lambda}$. The uncertainty band of the theory prediction curve shows the cross-section uncertainty.
Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the cross section of nonresonant Higgs boson pair production as a function of the Higgs boson self-coupling modifier $\kappa_{\lambda}= \lambda_{HHH}/\lambda^{\textrm{SM}}_{HHH}$. The expected constraints on $\kappa_{\lambda}$ are obtained with a background hypothesis excluding $pp \rightarrow HH$ production. The $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ variations about the expected limit due to statistical and systematic uncertainties are also shown. The theory prediction curve represents the scenario where all parameters and couplings are set to their SM values except for $\kappa_{\lambda}$. The uncertainty band of the theory prediction curve shows the cross-section uncertainty.
Values of the negative log-profile-likelihood ratio ($-2ln\Lambda$) as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ evaluated for the combination of all the categories of the nonresonant search. The coupling of the Higgs boson to fermions and gauge bosons is set to SM values in the profile likelihood calculation. The Asimov data set is generated under the SM signal-plus-background hypothesis, $\kappa_{\lambda}$= 1. All systematic uncertainties, including the theoretical uncertainties in the di-Higgs boson production cross section, are included. The intersections of the solid curves and the horizontal dashed lines indicate the 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ confidence-level intervals.
Values of the negative log-profile-likelihood ratio ($-2ln\Lambda$) as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ evaluated for the combination of all the categories of the nonresonant search. The coupling of the Higgs boson to fermions and gauge bosons is set to SM values in the profile likelihood calculation. The Asimov data set is generated under the SM signal-plus-background hypothesis, $\kappa_{\lambda}$= 1. All systematic uncertainties, including the theoretical uncertainties in the di-Higgs boson production cross section, are included. The intersections of the solid curves and the horizontal dashed lines indicate the 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ confidence-level intervals.
Values of the negative log-profile-likelihood ratio ($-2ln\Lambda$) as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ evaluated for the combination of all the categories of the nonresonant search. The coupling of the Higgs boson to fermions and gauge bosons is set to SM values in the profile likelihood calculation. The Asimov data set is generated under the SM signal-plus-background hypothesis, $\kappa_{\lambda}$= 1. All systematic uncertainties, including the theoretical uncertainties in the di-Higgs boson production cross section, are included. The intersections of the solid curves and the horizontal dashed lines indicate the 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ confidence-level intervals.
Values of the negative log-profile-likelihood ratio ($-2ln\Lambda$) as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ evaluated for the combination of all the categories of the nonresonant search. The coupling of the Higgs boson to fermions and gauge bosons is set to SM values in the profile likelihood calculation. The Asimov data set is generated under the SM signal-plus-background hypothesis, $\kappa_{\lambda}$= 1. All systematic uncertainties, including the theoretical uncertainties in the di-Higgs boson production cross section, are included. The intersections of the solid curves and the horizontal dashed lines indicate the 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ confidence-level intervals.
The number of events observed in the 120 < $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ < 130 GeV window in data, the number of events expected for scalar resonance signals of masses $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV and $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV assuming a total production cross section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow X \rightarrow HH)$ equal to the observed exclusion limits of Figure 15, and events expected for SM $HH$ and single Higgs boson production (estimated using MC simulation), as well as for continuum background. The values are obtained from a fit of the Asimov data set generated under the signal-plus-background hypothesis. The continuum background component of the Asimov data set is obtained from the fit of the data sideband. The uncertainties in the resonant signals and the SM $HH$ and single-Higgs-boson backgrounds include the systematic uncertainties discussed in Section 6. The uncertainty in the continuum background is given by the sum in quadrature of the statistical uncertainty from the fit to the data and the spurious-signal uncertainty.
The number of events observed in the 120 < $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ < 130 GeV window in data, the number of events expected for scalar resonance signals of masses $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV and $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV assuming a total production cross section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow X \rightarrow HH)$ equal to the observed exclusion limits of Figure 15, and events expected for SM $HH$ and single Higgs boson production (estimated using MC simulation), as well as for continuum background. The values are obtained from a fit of the Asimov data set generated under the signal-plus-background hypothesis. The continuum background component of the Asimov data set is obtained from the fit of the data sideband. The uncertainties in the resonant signals and the SM $HH$ and single-Higgs-boson backgrounds include the systematic uncertainties discussed in Section 6. The uncertainty in the continuum background is given by the sum in quadrature of the statistical uncertainty from the fit to the data and the spurious-signal uncertainty.
The number of events observed in the 120 < $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ < 130 GeV window in data, the number of events expected for scalar resonance signals of masses $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV and $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV assuming a total production cross section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow X \rightarrow HH)$ equal to the observed exclusion limits of Figure 15, and events expected for SM $HH$ and single Higgs boson production (estimated using MC simulation), as well as for continuum background. The values are obtained from a fit of the Asimov data set generated under the signal-plus-background hypothesis. The continuum background component of the Asimov data set is obtained from the fit of the data sideband. The uncertainties in the resonant signals and the SM $HH$ and single-Higgs-boson backgrounds include the systematic uncertainties discussed in Section 6. The uncertainty in the continuum background is given by the sum in quadrature of the statistical uncertainty from the fit to the data and the spurious-signal uncertainty.
The number of events observed in the 120 < $m_{\gamma\gamma}$ < 130 GeV window in data, the number of events expected for scalar resonance signals of masses $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV and $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV assuming a total production cross section $\sigma(pp \rightarrow X \rightarrow HH)$ equal to the observed exclusion limits of Figure 15, and events expected for SM $HH$ and single Higgs boson production (estimated using MC simulation), as well as for continuum background. The values are obtained from a fit of the Asimov data set generated under the signal-plus-background hypothesis. The continuum background component of the Asimov data set is obtained from the fit of the data sideband. The uncertainties in the resonant signals and the SM $HH$ and single-Higgs-boson backgrounds include the systematic uncertainties discussed in Section 6. The uncertainty in the continuum background is given by the sum in quadrature of the statistical uncertainty from the fit to the data and the spurious-signal uncertainty.
Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the production cross section of a narrow-width scalar resonance $X$ as a function of the mass $m_{X}$ of the hypothetical scalar particle. The black solid line represents the observed upper limits. The dashed line represents the expected upper limits. The $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ variations about the expected limit due to statistical and systematic uncertainties are also shown.
Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the production cross section of a narrow-width scalar resonance $X$ as a function of the mass $m_{X}$ of the hypothetical scalar particle. The black solid line represents the observed upper limits. The dashed line represents the expected upper limits. The $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ variations about the expected limit due to statistical and systematic uncertainties are also shown.
Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the production cross section of a narrow-width scalar resonance $X$ as a function of the mass $m_{X}$ of the hypothetical scalar particle. The black solid line represents the observed upper limits. The dashed line represents the expected upper limits. The $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ variations about the expected limit due to statistical and systematic uncertainties are also shown.
Observed and expected limits at 95% CL on the production cross section of a narrow-width scalar resonance $X$ as a function of the mass $m_{X}$ of the hypothetical scalar particle. The black solid line represents the observed upper limits. The dashed line represents the expected upper limits. The $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ variations about the expected limit due to statistical and systematic uncertainties are also shown.
Breakdown of the dominant systematic uncertainties. The impact of the uncertainties is defined according to the statistical analysis described in Section 7. It corresponds to the relative variation of the expected upper limit on the cross section when re-evaluating the profile likelihood ratio after fixing the nuisance parameter in question to its best-fit value, while all remaining nuisance parameters remain free to float. The impact is shown in %. Only systematic uncertainties with an impact of at least 0.2% are shown. Uncertainties of the "Norm. + Shape" type affect both the normalization and the parameters of the functional form. The rest of the uncertainties affect only the yields.
Breakdown of the dominant systematic uncertainties. The impact of the uncertainties is defined according to the statistical analysis described in Section 7. It corresponds to the relative variation of the expected upper limit on the cross section when re-evaluating the profile likelihood ratio after fixing the nuisance parameter in question to its best-fit value, while all remaining nuisance parameters remain free to float. The impact is shown in %. Only systematic uncertainties with an impact of at least 0.2% are shown. Uncertainties of the "Norm. + Shape" type affect both the normalization and the parameters of the functional form. The rest of the uncertainties affect only the yields.
Breakdown of the dominant systematic uncertainties. The impact of the uncertainties is defined according to the statistical analysis described in Section 7. It corresponds to the relative variation of the expected upper limit on the cross section when re-evaluating the profile likelihood ratio after fixing the nuisance parameter in question to its best-fit value, while all remaining nuisance parameters remain free to float. The impact is shown in %. Only systematic uncertainties with an impact of at least 0.2% are shown. Uncertainties of the "Norm. + Shape" type affect both the normalization and the parameters of the functional form. The rest of the uncertainties affect only the yields.
Breakdown of the dominant systematic uncertainties. The impact of the uncertainties is defined according to the statistical analysis described in Section 7. It corresponds to the relative variation of the expected upper limit on the cross section when re-evaluating the profile likelihood ratio after fixing the nuisance parameter in question to its best-fit value, while all remaining nuisance parameters remain free to float. The impact is shown in %. Only systematic uncertainties with an impact of at least 0.2% are shown. Uncertainties of the "Norm. + Shape" type affect both the normalization and the parameters of the functional form. The rest of the uncertainties affect only the yields.
Cutflow for nonresonant di-Higgs ggF signal sample, yields are normalized to 139 $fb^{-1}$.
Cutflow for nonresonant di-Higgs ggF signal sample, yields are normalized to 139 $fb^{-1}$.
Cutflow for nonresonant di-Higgs ggF signal sample, yields are normalized to 139 $fb^{-1}$.
Cutflow for nonresonant di-Higgs ggF signal sample, yields are normalized to 139 $fb^{-1}$.
Cutflow for resonant signal sample, with $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV, yields are normalized to 139 $fb^{-1}$.
Cutflow for resonant signal sample, with $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV, yields are normalized to 139 $fb^{-1}$.
Cutflow for resonant signal sample, with $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV, yields are normalized to 139 $fb^{-1}$.
Cutflow for resonant signal sample, with $m_{X}$ = 300 GeV, yields are normalized to 139 $fb^{-1}$.
Cutflow for resonant signal sample, with $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV, yields are normalized to 139 $fb^{-1}$.
Cutflow for resonant signal sample, with $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV, yields are normalized to 139 $fb^{-1}$.
Cutflow for resonant signal sample, with $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV, yields are normalized to 139 $fb^{-1}$.
Cutflow for resonant signal sample, with $m_{X}$ = 500 GeV, yields are normalized to 139 $fb^{-1}$.
Comparison of $m_{b\bar{b}}$ distributions when applying the specific b-jet energy calibration and the nominal jet energy calibration. The distributions are fitted using a Bukin function, and the values of the peak position, resolution and the relative improvement are reported in the legend.
Comparison of $m_{b\bar{b}}$ distributions when applying the specific b-jet energy calibration and the nominal jet energy calibration. The distributions are fitted using a Bukin function, and the values of the peak position, resolution and the relative improvement are reported in the legend.
Comparison of $m_{b\bar{b}}$ distributions when applying the specific b-jet energy calibration and the nominal jet energy calibration. The distributions are fitted using a Bukin function, and the values of the peak position, resolution and the relative improvement are reported in the legend.
Comparison of $m_{b\bar{b}}$ distributions when applying the specific b-jet energy calibration and the nominal jet energy calibration. The distributions are fitted using a Bukin function, and the values of the peak position, resolution and the relative improvement are reported in the legend.
Fit results of $m_{b\bar{b}}$ distributions when applying the specific b-jet energy calibration and the nominal jet energy calibration. The distributions are fitted using a Bukin function, and the values of the peak position, resolution and the relative improvement are reported in the legend.
Fit results of $m_{b\bar{b}}$ distributions when applying the specific b-jet energy calibration and the nominal jet energy calibration. The distributions are fitted using a Bukin function, and the values of the peak position, resolution and the relative improvement are reported in the legend.
Fit results of $m_{b\bar{b}}$ distributions when applying the specific b-jet energy calibration and the nominal jet energy calibration. The distributions are fitted using a Bukin function, and the values of the peak position, resolution and the relative improvement are reported in the legend.
Fit results of $m_{b\bar{b}}$ distributions when applying the specific b-jet energy calibration and the nominal jet energy calibration. The distributions are fitted using a Bukin function, and the values of the peak position, resolution and the relative improvement are reported in the legend.
The relative amount (purity) of expected events from SM $HH$ and single Higgs boson production processes for each of the four categories of the nonresonant search. The Higgs boson pair production with $k_{\lambda} = 1$ is considered as signal in (a), while the case with $k_{\lambda} = 10$ is considered as signal in (b).
The relative amount (purity) of expected events from SM $HH$ and single Higgs boson production processes for each of the four categories of the nonresonant search. The Higgs boson pair production with $k_{\lambda} = 1$ is considered as signal in (a), while the case with $k_{\lambda} = 10$ is considered as signal in (b).
The relative amount (purity) of expected events from SM $HH$ and single Higgs boson production processes for each of the four categories of the nonresonant search. The Higgs boson pair production with $k_{\lambda} = 1$ is considered as signal in (a), while the case with $k_{\lambda} = 10$ is considered as signal in (b).
The relative amount (purity) of expected events from SM $HH$ and single Higgs boson production processes for each of the four categories of the nonresonant search. The Higgs boson pair production with $k_{\lambda} = 1$ is considered as signal in (a), while the case with $k_{\lambda} = 10$ is considered as signal in (b).
The expected significance in each of the four categories of the nonresonant search. The Higgs boson pair production with $k_{\lambda} = 1$ is considered as signal in (a), while the case with $k_{\lambda} = 10$ is considered as signal in (b). The single Higgs boson processes and the di-photon continuum spectrum are considered as background.
The expected significance in each of the four categories of the nonresonant search. The Higgs boson pair production with $k_{\lambda} = 1$ is considered as signal in (a), while the case with $k_{\lambda} = 10$ is considered as signal in (b). The single Higgs boson processes and the di-photon continuum spectrum are considered as background.
The expected significance in each of the four categories of the nonresonant search. The Higgs boson pair production with $k_{\lambda} = 1$ is considered as signal in (a), while the case with $k_{\lambda} = 10$ is considered as signal in (b). The single Higgs boson processes and the di-photon continuum spectrum are considered as background.
The expected significance in each of the four categories of the nonresonant search. The Higgs boson pair production with $k_{\lambda} = 1$ is considered as signal in (a), while the case with $k_{\lambda} = 10$ is considered as signal in (b). The single Higgs boson processes and the di-photon continuum spectrum are considered as background.
Spurious signal result for the exponential pdf for the various ggF nonresonant di-Higgs categories. In each category, the spurious signal value ($n_{sp}$) and its ratio to the expected statistical error ($Z_{spur}$) from data are shown.
Spurious signal result for the exponential pdf for the various ggF nonresonant di-Higgs categories. In each category, the spurious signal value ($n_{sp}$) and its ratio to the expected statistical error ($Z_{spur}$) from data are shown.
Spurious signal result for the exponential pdf for the various ggF nonresonant di-Higgs categories. In each category, the spurious signal value ($n_{sp}$) and its ratio to the expected statistical error ($Z_{spur}$) from data are shown.
Spurious signal result for the exponential pdf for the various ggF nonresonant di-Higgs categories. In each category, the spurious signal value ($n_{sp}$) and its ratio to the expected statistical error ($Z_{spur}$) from data are shown.
Spurious signal result for the exponential pdf as function of the resonant di-Higgs signal mass. The spurious signal value and its ratio to the expected statistical error from data are shown.
Spurious signal result for the exponential pdf as function of the resonant di-Higgs signal mass. The spurious signal value and its ratio to the expected statistical error from data are shown.
Spurious signal result for the exponential pdf as function of the resonant di-Higgs signal mass. The spurious signal value and its ratio to the expected statistical error from data are shown.
Spurious signal result for the exponential pdf as function of the resonant di-Higgs signal mass. The spurious signal value and its ratio to the expected statistical error from data are shown.
Distributions of the signal efficiency as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$, for the di-Higgs boson ggF nonresonant production mode. The range of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in the table is from -10 to 10.
Distributions of the signal efficiency as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$, for the di-Higgs boson ggF nonresonant production mode. The range of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in the table is from -10 to 10.
Distributions of the signal efficiency as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$, for the di-Higgs boson ggF nonresonant production mode. The range of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in the table is from -10 to 10.
Distributions of the signal efficiency as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$, for the di-Higgs boson ggF nonresonant production mode. The range of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in the table is from -10 to 10.
Distributions of the signal efficiency as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$, for the di-Higgs boson VBF nonresonant production mode. The range of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in the table is from -10 to 10.
Distributions of the signal efficiency as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$, for the di-Higgs boson VBF nonresonant production mode. The range of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in the table is from -10 to 10.
Distributions of the signal efficiency as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$, for the di-Higgs boson VBF nonresonant production mode. The range of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in the table is from -10 to 10.
Distributions of the signal efficiency as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$, for the di-Higgs boson VBF nonresonant production mode. The range of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ in the table is from -10 to 10.
Values of the negative log-profile-likelihood ($-2ln\Lambda$) as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ evaluated for the combination of all the categories of the nonresonant search. The coupling of the Higgs boson to fermions and gauge bosons is set to SM values in the profile likelihood calculation. The Asimov data set is generated under the SM signal-plus-background hypothesis, $\kappa_{\lambda}$= 1. All systematic uncertainties, including the theoretical uncertainties on the di-Higgs boson production cross section, are included. The intersections of the solid curves and the horizontal dashed lines indicate the 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ confidence level intervals. The best fit value corresponds to $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = $2.8^{+2.0}_{-2.2}(^{+3.8}_{-4.3})$ for the 1$\sigma$(2$\sigma$) confidence interval. The expected value corresponds to $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = $1.0^{+5.5}_{-2.4}(^{+7.3}_{-4.2})$ for the 1$\sigma$(2$\sigma$) confidence interval. The dashed curves represent values of the negative log-profile-likelihood where the Higgs boson branching fractions and the cross section of the production modes are varied as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$. In this case,the best fit value corresponds to $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = $2.7^{+2.0}_{-2.2}(^{+3.8}_{-4.3})$ and the expected value corresponds to $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = $1.0^{+5.4}_{-2.5}(^{+7.3}_{-4.3})$ for the 1$\sigma$(2$\sigma$) confidence interval.
Values of the negative log-profile-likelihood ($-2ln\Lambda$) as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ evaluated for the combination of all the categories of the nonresonant search. The coupling of the Higgs boson to fermions and gauge bosons is set to SM values in the profile likelihood calculation. The Asimov data set is generated under the SM signal-plus-background hypothesis, $\kappa_{\lambda}$= 1. All systematic uncertainties, including the theoretical uncertainties on the di-Higgs boson production cross section, are included. The intersections of the solid curves and the horizontal dashed lines indicate the 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ confidence level intervals. The best fit value corresponds to $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = $2.8^{+2.0}_{-2.2}(^{+3.8}_{-4.3})$ for the 1$\sigma$(2$\sigma$) confidence interval. The expected value corresponds to $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = $1.0^{+5.5}_{-2.4}(^{+7.3}_{-4.2})$ for the 1$\sigma$(2$\sigma$) confidence interval. The dashed curves represent values of the negative log-profile-likelihood where the Higgs boson branching fractions and the cross section of the production modes are varied as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$. In this case,the best fit value corresponds to $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = $2.7^{+2.0}_{-2.2}(^{+3.8}_{-4.3})$ and the expected value corresponds to $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = $1.0^{+5.4}_{-2.5}(^{+7.3}_{-4.3})$ for the 1$\sigma$(2$\sigma$) confidence interval.
Values of the negative log-profile-likelihood ($-2ln\Lambda$) as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ evaluated for the combination of all the categories of the nonresonant search. The coupling of the Higgs boson to fermions and gauge bosons is set to SM values in the profile likelihood calculation. The Asimov data set is generated under the SM signal-plus-background hypothesis, $\kappa_{\lambda}$= 1. All systematic uncertainties, including the theoretical uncertainties on the di-Higgs boson production cross section, are included. The intersections of the solid curves and the horizontal dashed lines indicate the 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ confidence level intervals. The best fit value corresponds to $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = $2.8^{+2.0}_{-2.2}(^{+3.8}_{-4.3})$ for the 1$\sigma$(2$\sigma$) confidence interval. The expected value corresponds to $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = $1.0^{+5.5}_{-2.4}(^{+7.3}_{-4.2})$ for the 1$\sigma$(2$\sigma$) confidence interval. The dashed curves represent values of the negative log-profile-likelihood where the Higgs boson branching fractions and the cross section of the production modes are varied as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$. In this case,the best fit value corresponds to $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = $2.7^{+2.0}_{-2.2}(^{+3.8}_{-4.3})$ and the expected value corresponds to $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = $1.0^{+5.4}_{-2.5}(^{+7.3}_{-4.3})$ for the 1$\sigma$(2$\sigma$) confidence interval.
Values of the negative log-profile-likelihood ($-2ln\Lambda$) as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$ evaluated for the combination of all the categories of the nonresonant search. The coupling of the Higgs boson to fermions and gauge bosons is set to SM values in the profile likelihood calculation. The Asimov data set is generated under the SM signal-plus-background hypothesis, $\kappa_{\lambda}$= 1. All systematic uncertainties, including the theoretical uncertainties on the di-Higgs boson production cross section, are included. The intersections of the solid curves and the horizontal dashed lines indicate the 1$\sigma$ and 2$\sigma$ confidence level intervals. The best fit value corresponds to $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = $2.8^{+2.0}_{-2.2}(^{+3.8}_{-4.3})$ for the 1$\sigma$(2$\sigma$) confidence interval. The expected value corresponds to $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = $1.0^{+5.5}_{-2.4}(^{+7.3}_{-4.2})$ for the 1$\sigma$(2$\sigma$) confidence interval. The dashed curves represent values of the negative log-profile-likelihood where the Higgs boson branching fractions and the cross section of the production modes are varied as a function of $\kappa_{\lambda}$. In this case,the best fit value corresponds to $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = $2.7^{+2.0}_{-2.2}(^{+3.8}_{-4.3})$ and the expected value corresponds to $\kappa_{\lambda}$ = $1.0^{+5.4}_{-2.5}(^{+7.3}_{-4.3})$ for the 1$\sigma$(2$\sigma$) confidence interval.
Minimum BDT value of the events passing the selection criteria of the resonant search. The combined BDT score is formed using as coefficients $C_{1}$ = 0.65 and $C_{2}$ = 1 − $C_{1}$. The selection efficiency for the resonant $X \rightarrow HH$ signal is also shown.
Minimum BDT value of the events passing the selection criteria of the resonant search. The combined BDT score is formed using as coefficients $C_{1}$ = 0.65 and $C_{2}$ = 1 − $C_{1}$. The selection efficiency for the resonant $X \rightarrow HH$ signal is also shown.
Minimum BDT value of the events passing the selection criteria of the resonant search. The combined BDT score is formed using as coefficients $C_{1}$ = 0.65 and $C_{2}$ = 1 − $C_{1}$. The selection efficiency for the resonant $X \rightarrow HH$ signal is also shown.
Minimum BDT value of the events passing the selection criteria of the resonant search. The combined BDT score is formed using as coefficients $C_{1}$ = 0.65 and $C_{2}$ = 1 − $C_{1}$. The selection efficiency for the resonant $X \rightarrow HH$ signal is also shown.
A direct search for Higgs bosons produced via vector-boson fusion and subsequently decaying into invisible particles is reported. The analysis uses 139 $\text{fb}^{-1}$ of $pp$ collision data at a centre-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}$=13 $\text{TeV}$ recorded by the ATLAS detector at the LHC. The observed numbers of events are found to be in agreement with the background expectation from Standard Model processes. For a scalar Higgs boson with a mass of 125 $\text{GeV}$ and a Standard Model production cross section, an observed upper limit of $0.145$ is placed on the branching fraction of its decay into invisible particles at 95% confidence level, with an expected limit of $0.103$. These results are interpreted in the context of models where the Higgs boson acts as a portal to dark matter, and limits are set on the scattering cross section of weakly interacting massive particles and nucleons. Invisible decays of additional scalar bosons with masses from 50 $\text{GeV}$ to 2 $\text{TeV}$ are also studied, and the derived upper limits on the cross section times branching fraction decrease with increasing mass from 1.0 $\text{pb}$ for a scalar boson mass of 50 $\text{GeV}$ to 0.1 $\text{pb}$ at a mass of 2 $\text{TeV}$.
Yields after each selection criterion for a signal sample of an invisibly decaying Higgs boson produced in VBF and ggF for 139 $fb^{-1}$ of data. The lines 'Timing of j1/j2' are referring to requirements that are part of the jet cleaning, and which ensure that the timing of the two leading jets is compatible with the bunch crossing. The last sixteen rows show the yield in each SR bin and the efficiency with respect to the inclusive signal region.
A search for supersymmetry targeting the direct production of winos and higgsinos is conducted in final states with either two leptons ($e$ or $\mu$) with the same electric charge, or three leptons. The analysis uses 139 fb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collision data at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV collected with the ATLAS detector during Run 2 of the Large Hadron Collider. No significant excess over the Standard Model expectation is observed. Simplified and complete models with and without $R$-parity conservation are considered. In topologies with intermediate states including either $Wh$ or $WZ$ pairs, wino masses up to 525 GeV and 250 GeV are excluded, respectively, for a bino of vanishing mass. Higgsino masses smaller than 440 GeV are excluded in a natural $R$-parity-violating model with bilinear terms. Upper limits on the production cross section of generic events beyond the Standard Model as low as 40 ab are obtained in signal regions optimised for these models and also for an $R$-parity-violating scenario with baryon-number-violating higgsino decays into top quarks and jets. The analysis significantly improves sensitivity to supersymmetric models and other processes beyond the Standard Model that may contribute to the considered final states.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 13(b) and Fig 8(aux).
positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 13(b) and Fig 8(aux).
negative $\sigma$ variation of observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 13(b) and Fig 8(aux).
Observed excluded cross-section at 95% CL for the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 8(aux).
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL for the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production.
Observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the Wh-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from from Fig 13(a) and from Fig 7 and Fig 10(aux).
Observed excluded cross-section at 95% CL for the Wh-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 7(aux) and Fig 10(aux).
positive one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the Wh-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from from Fig 13(a) and from Fig 7 and Fig 10(aux).
negative one $\sigma$ observed exclusion limits at 95% CL for the Wh-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from from Fig 13(a) and from Fig 7 and Fig 10(aux).
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL for the Wh-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL for the Wh-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production.
Expected exclusion limits at 95% CL for the Wh-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region $SR^{bRPV}_{2l-SS}$. in a susy scenario where $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are produced in pairs and decay to all possible allowed bRPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV, tan$\beta$=5. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region $SR^{bRPV}_{3l}$. in a susy scenario where $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are produced in pairs and decay to all possible allowed bRPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV, tan$\beta$=5. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region $SR^{WZ}_{high-m_{T2}}$. The wino-like doublet pair ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$) were produced and then decays into $bino-like \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}$ which is the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) accompanied by mass on-shell or mass off-shell W and Z bosons. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 150 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1})$ = 50 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the signal region $SR^{WZ}_{low-m_{T2}}$. The wino-like doublet pair ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$) were produced and then decays into $bino-like \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}$ which is the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) accompanied by mass on-shell or mass off-shell W and Z bosons. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 150 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1})$ = 50 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the low mass $SR^{RPV}_{2l1b}$, where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the medium mass $SR^{RPV}_{2l1b}$, where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the low mass $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}$, where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the medium mass $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}$, where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the high mass $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}$, where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the low mass $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}$, where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the medium mass $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}$, where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the high mass $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}$, where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 200 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the $SR^{Wh}_{low-m_{T2} }$. The wino-like doublet pair ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$) were produced and then decays into $bino-like \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}$ which is the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) accompanied by mass on-shell or mass off-shell W and Higgs bosons. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 300 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1})$ = 100 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Number of signal events expected for 139 fb$^{-1}$ at different stages of the event selection for the $SR^{Wh}_{high-m_{T2} }$. The wino-like doublet pair ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$) were produced and then decays into $bino-like \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}$ which is the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) accompanied by mass on-shell or mass off-shell W and Higgs bosons. The masses of the superpartners involved in the process are set to $m(\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2})$ = 300 GeV, $m(\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1})$ = 100 GeV. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.
Signal Hepdataeptance for $SR^{bRPV}_{2l-SS}$ signal region from Fig 13(a)(aux) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are produced in pairs and decay to all possible allowed bRPV decays.
Signal Hepdataeptance for $SR^{bRPV}_{3l}$ signal region from Fig 13(b)(aux) in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are produced in pairs and decay to all possible allowed bRPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{WZ}_{high-m_{T2}}$ in a SUSY scenario where the wino-like doublet pair ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$) were produced and then decays into $bino-like \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}$ which is the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) accompanied by mass on-shell or mass off-shell W and Z bosons.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{WZ}_{low-m_{T2}}$ in a SUSY scenario where the wino-like doublet pair ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$) were produced and then decays into $bino-like \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}$ which is the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) accompanied by mass on-shell or mass off-shell W and Z bosons.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{RPV}_{2l1b}-L$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{RPV}_{2l1b}-M$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}-L$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}-M$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}-H$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}-L$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}-M$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}-H$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{bRPV}_{2l-SS}$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are produced in pairs and decay to all possible allowed bRPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{bRPV}_{3l}$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are produced in pairs and decay to all possible allowed bRPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{WZ}_{high-m_{T2}}$ in a SUSY scenario where the wino-like doublet pair ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$) were produced and then decays into $bino-like \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}$ which is the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) accompanied by mass on-shell or mass off-shell W and Z bosons.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{WZ}_{low-m_{T2}}$ in a SUSY scenario where the wino-like doublet pair ($\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$) were produced and then decays into $bino-like \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1}$ which is the lightest SUSY particle (LSP) accompanied by mass on-shell or mass off-shell W and Z bosons.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{RPV}_{2l1b}-L$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{RPV}_{2l1b}-M$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}-L$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}-M$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}-H$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}-L$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}-M$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal efficiency for $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}-H$ signal region in a SUSY scenario where the $\tilde{\chi}^{0} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ are directly produced and undergoes prompt RPV decays.
Signal acceptance for $SR^{Wh}_{high-m_{T2} }$ signal region from Fig 11(a)(aux) in a SUSY scenario where direct production of a lightest $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ , decay with 100% branching ratio to a final state with a same sign light lepton (e or $\mu$) pair and two lightest neutralino1, via the on-shell emission of SM W and Higgs bosons,
Signal acceptance for $SR^{Wh}_{low-m_{T2} }$ signal region from Fig 11(b)(aux) in a SUSY scenario where direct production of a lightest $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ , decay with 100% branching ratio to a final state with a same sign light lepton (e or $\mu$) pair and two lightest neutralino1, via the on-shell emission of SM W and Higgs bosons,
Signal efficiency for $SR^{Wh}_{high-m_{T2} }$ signal region from Fig 15(a)(aux) in a SUSY scenario where direct production of a lightest $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ , decay with 100% branching ratio to a final state with a same sign light lepton (e or $\mu$) pair and two lightest neutralino1, via the on-shell emission of SM W and Higgs bosons,
Signal efficiency for $SR^{Wh}_{low-m_{T2} }$ signal region from Fig 15(b)(aux) in a SUSY scenario where direct production of a lightest $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm} _{1} and \tilde{\chi}^{0} _{2}$ , decay with 100% branching ratio to a final state with a same sign light lepton (e or $\mu$) pair and two lightest neutralino1, via the on-shell emission of SM W and Higgs bosons,
Observed 95% X-section upper limits as a function of higgsino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ mass in the bilinear RPV model from Fig 14.
Observed 95% X-section upper limits as a function of higgsino $\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ mass in the UDD RPV model from Fig 18.
Observed 95% X-section upper limits as a function of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ mass in the WZ-mediated simplified model of wino $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde{\chi}^{0}_{2}$ production from Fig 9(aux).
N-1 distributions for $m_{T2}$ of observed data and expected background towards $SR^{WZ}_{high-m_{T2}}$ from publication's Figure 11(a) . The last bin is inclusive.
N-1 distributions for $m_{T2}$ of observed data and expected background towards $SR^{WZ}_{low-m_{T2}}$ from publication's Figure 11(b) . The last bin is inclusive.
N-1 distributions for $m_{T2}$ of observed data and expected background towards $SR^{bRPV}_{2l-SS}$ from publication's Figure 11(c) . The last bin is inclusive.
N-1 distributions for $m_{T2}$ of observed data and expected background towards $SR^{bRPV}_{3l}$ from publication's Figure 11(d) . The last bin is inclusive.
N-1 distributions for $\sum p^{b-jet}_{T}/\sum p^{jet}_{T}$ of observed data and expected background towards $SR^{RPV}_{2l1b}-L$ from publication's Figure 16(a) . The last bin is inclusive.
N-1 distributions for $\sum p^{b-jet}_{T}/\sum p^{jet}_{T}$ of observed data and expected background towards $SR^{RPV}_{2l2b}-M$ from publication's Figure 16(b) . The last bin is inclusive.
N-1 distributions for $\sum p^{b-jet}_{T}/\sum p^{jet}_{T}$ of observed data and expected background towards $SR^{RPV}_{2l3b}-H$ from publication's Figure 16(c) . The last bin is inclusive.
N-1 distribution for $E_{T}^{miss}$ in $SR^{Wh}_{high-m_{T2} }$ in ee channel
N-1 distribution for $E_{T}^{miss}$ in $SR^{Wh}_{high-m_{T2} }$ in e$\mu$ channel
N-1 distribution for $E_{T}^{miss}$ in $SR^{Wh}_{high-m_{T2} }$ in $\mu\mu$ channel
N-1 distribution for $\mathcal{S}(E_{T}^{miss})$ in $SR^{Wh}_{low-m_{T2} }$ in ee channel
N-1 distribution for $\mathcal{S}(E_{T}^{miss})$ in $SR^{Wh}_{low-m_{T2} }$ in e$\mu$ channel
N-1 distribution for $\mathcal{S}(E_{T}^{miss})$ in $SR^{Wh}_{low-m_{T2} }$ in $\mu\mu$ channel
A search is presented for displaced production of Higgs bosons or $Z$ bosons, originating from the decay of a neutral long-lived particle (LLP) and reconstructed in the decay modes $H\rightarrow \gamma\gamma$ and $Z\rightarrow ee$. The analysis uses the full Run 2 data set of proton$-$proton collisions delivered by the LHC at an energy of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV between 2015 and 2018 and recorded by the ATLAS detector, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. Exploiting the capabilities of the ATLAS liquid argon calorimeter to precisely measure the arrival times and trajectories of electromagnetic objects, the analysis searches for the signature of pairs of photons or electrons which arise from a common displaced vertex and which arrive after some delay at the calorimeter. The results are interpreted in a gauge-mediated supersymmetry breaking model with pair-produced higgsinos that decay to LLPs, and each LLP subsequently decays into either a Higgs boson or a $Z$ boson. The final state includes at least two particles that escape direct detection, giving rise to missing transverse momentum. No significant excess is observed above the background expectation. The results are used to set upper limits on the cross section for higgsino pair production, up to a $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass of 369 (704) GeV for decays with 100% branching ratio of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ to Higgs ($Z$) bosons for a $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime of 2 ns. A model-independent limit is also set on the production of pairs of photons or electrons with a significant delay in arrival at the calorimeter.
Average timing distributions for SR data and the estimated background as determined by the background-only fit, in each of the five exclusive $\rho$ categories. For comparison, the expected timing shapes for a few different signal models are superimposed, with each model labeled by the values of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass and lifetime, as well as decay mode. To provide some indication of the variations in signal yield and shape, three signal models are shown for each of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decay modes, namely $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $H \tilde G$ and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $Z \tilde G$. The models shown include a rather low $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value of 135 GeV for lifetimes of either 2 ns or 10 ns, and a higher $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value which is near the 95% CL exclusion limit for each decay mode for a lifetime of 2 ns. Each signal model is shown with the signal normalization corresponding to a BR value of unity for the decay mode in question.
Average timing distributions for SR data and the estimated background as determined by the background-only fit, in each of the five exclusive $\rho$ categories. For comparison, the expected timing shapes for a few different signal models are superimposed, with each model labeled by the values of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass and lifetime, as well as decay mode. To provide some indication of the variations in signal yield and shape, three signal models are shown for each of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decay modes, namely $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $H \tilde G$ and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $Z \tilde G$. The models shown include a rather low $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value of 135 GeV for lifetimes of either 2 ns or 10 ns, and a higher $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value which is near the 95% CL exclusion limit for each decay mode for a lifetime of 2 ns. Each signal model is shown with the signal normalization corresponding to a BR value of unity for the decay mode in question.
Average timing distributions for SR data and the estimated background as determined by the background-only fit, in each of the five exclusive $\rho$ categories. For comparison, the expected timing shapes for a few different signal models are superimposed, with each model labeled by the values of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass and lifetime, as well as decay mode. To provide some indication of the variations in signal yield and shape, three signal models are shown for each of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decay modes, namely $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $H \tilde G$ and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $Z \tilde G$. The models shown include a rather low $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value of 135 GeV for lifetimes of either 2 ns or 10 ns, and a higher $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value which is near the 95% CL exclusion limit for each decay mode for a lifetime of 2 ns. Each signal model is shown with the signal normalization corresponding to a BR value of unity for the decay mode in question.
Average timing distributions for SR data and the estimated background as determined by the background-only fit, in each of the five exclusive $\rho$ categories. For comparison, the expected timing shapes for a few different signal models are superimposed, with each model labeled by the values of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass and lifetime, as well as decay mode. To provide some indication of the variations in signal yield and shape, three signal models are shown for each of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decay modes, namely $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $H \tilde G$ and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $Z \tilde G$. The models shown include a rather low $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value of 135 GeV for lifetimes of either 2 ns or 10 ns, and a higher $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value which is near the 95% CL exclusion limit for each decay mode for a lifetime of 2 ns. Each signal model is shown with the signal normalization corresponding to a BR value of unity for the decay mode in question.
Average timing distributions for SR data and the estimated background as determined by the background-only fit, in each of the five exclusive $\rho$ categories. For comparison, the expected timing shapes for a few different signal models are superimposed, with each model labeled by the values of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass and lifetime, as well as decay mode. To provide some indication of the variations in signal yield and shape, three signal models are shown for each of the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decay modes, namely $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $H \tilde G$ and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow$ $Z \tilde G$. The models shown include a rather low $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value of 135 GeV for lifetimes of either 2 ns or 10 ns, and a higher $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass value which is near the 95% CL exclusion limit for each decay mode for a lifetime of 2 ns. Each signal model is shown with the signal normalization corresponding to a BR value of unity for the decay mode in question.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass (left) and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime (right), for the different decay modes of $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$) = 1 (top) and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 (bottom). For the limits as a function of mass (lifetime), several signal models with varying lifetime (mass) are overlaid for comparison. Included are the theoretical expectations from higgsino production for each mass hypothesis, calculated from a GMSB SUSY model that assumes nearly degenerate $\tilde\chi^0_1$, $\tilde\chi^\pm_1$, and $\tilde\chi^0_2$.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass (left) and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime (right), for the different decay modes of $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$) = 1 (top) and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 (bottom). For the limits as a function of mass (lifetime), several signal models with varying lifetime (mass) are overlaid for comparison. Included are the theoretical expectations from higgsino production for each mass hypothesis, calculated from a GMSB SUSY model that assumes nearly degenerate $\tilde\chi^0_1$, $\tilde\chi^\pm_1$, and $\tilde\chi^0_2$.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass (left) and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime (right), for the different decay modes of $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$) = 1 (top) and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 (bottom). For the limits as a function of mass (lifetime), several signal models with varying lifetime (mass) are overlaid for comparison. Included are the theoretical expectations from higgsino production for each mass hypothesis, calculated from a GMSB SUSY model that assumes nearly degenerate $\tilde\chi^0_1$, $\tilde\chi^\pm_1$, and $\tilde\chi^0_2$.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass (left) and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime (right), for the different decay modes of $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$) = 1 (top) and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 (bottom). For the limits as a function of mass (lifetime), several signal models with varying lifetime (mass) are overlaid for comparison. Included are the theoretical expectations from higgsino production for each mass hypothesis, calculated from a GMSB SUSY model that assumes nearly degenerate $\tilde\chi^0_1$, $\tilde\chi^\pm_1$, and $\tilde\chi^0_2$.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass (left) and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime (right), for the different decay modes of $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$) = 1 (top) and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 (bottom). For the limits as a function of mass (lifetime), several signal models with varying lifetime (mass) are overlaid for comparison. Included are the theoretical expectations from higgsino production for each mass hypothesis, calculated from a GMSB SUSY model that assumes nearly degenerate $\tilde\chi^0_1$, $\tilde\chi^\pm_1$, and $\tilde\chi^0_2$.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass (left) and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime (right), for the different decay modes of $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$) = 1 (top) and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 (bottom). For the limits as a function of mass (lifetime), several signal models with varying lifetime (mass) are overlaid for comparison. Included are the theoretical expectations from higgsino production for each mass hypothesis, calculated from a GMSB SUSY model that assumes nearly degenerate $\tilde\chi^0_1$, $\tilde\chi^\pm_1$, and $\tilde\chi^0_2$.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass (left) and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime (right), for the different decay modes of $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$) = 1 (top) and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 (bottom). For the limits as a function of mass (lifetime), several signal models with varying lifetime (mass) are overlaid for comparison. Included are the theoretical expectations from higgsino production for each mass hypothesis, calculated from a GMSB SUSY model that assumes nearly degenerate $\tilde\chi^0_1$, $\tilde\chi^\pm_1$, and $\tilde\chi^0_2$.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass (left) and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime (right), for the different decay modes of $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$) = 1 (top) and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 (bottom). For the limits as a function of mass (lifetime), several signal models with varying lifetime (mass) are overlaid for comparison. Included are the theoretical expectations from higgsino production for each mass hypothesis, calculated from a GMSB SUSY model that assumes nearly degenerate $\tilde\chi^0_1$, $\tilde\chi^\pm_1$, and $\tilde\chi^0_2$.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass (left) and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime (right), for the different decay modes of $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$) = 1 (top) and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 (bottom). For the limits as a function of mass (lifetime), several signal models with varying lifetime (mass) are overlaid for comparison. Included are the theoretical expectations from higgsino production for each mass hypothesis, calculated from a GMSB SUSY model that assumes nearly degenerate $\tilde\chi^0_1$, $\tilde\chi^\pm_1$, and $\tilde\chi^0_2$.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass (left) and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime (right), for the different decay modes of $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$) = 1 (top) and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 (bottom). For the limits as a function of mass (lifetime), several signal models with varying lifetime (mass) are overlaid for comparison. Included are the theoretical expectations from higgsino production for each mass hypothesis, calculated from a GMSB SUSY model that assumes nearly degenerate $\tilde\chi^0_1$, $\tilde\chi^\pm_1$, and $\tilde\chi^0_2$.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass (left) and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime (right), for the different decay modes of $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$) = 1 (top) and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 (bottom). For the limits as a function of mass (lifetime), several signal models with varying lifetime (mass) are overlaid for comparison. Included are the theoretical expectations from higgsino production for each mass hypothesis, calculated from a GMSB SUSY model that assumes nearly degenerate $\tilde\chi^0_1$, $\tilde\chi^\pm_1$, and $\tilde\chi^0_2$.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass (left) and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime (right), for the different decay modes of $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$) = 1 (top) and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 (bottom). For the limits as a function of mass (lifetime), several signal models with varying lifetime (mass) are overlaid for comparison. Included are the theoretical expectations from higgsino production for each mass hypothesis, calculated from a GMSB SUSY model that assumes nearly degenerate $\tilde\chi^0_1$, $\tilde\chi^\pm_1$, and $\tilde\chi^0_2$.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass (left) and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime (right), for the different decay modes of $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$) = 1 (top) and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 (bottom). For the limits as a function of mass (lifetime), several signal models with varying lifetime (mass) are overlaid for comparison. Included are the theoretical expectations from higgsino production for each mass hypothesis, calculated from a GMSB SUSY model that assumes nearly degenerate $\tilde\chi^0_1$, $\tilde\chi^\pm_1$, and $\tilde\chi^0_2$.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass (left) and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime (right), for the different decay modes of $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$) = 1 (top) and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 (bottom). For the limits as a function of mass (lifetime), several signal models with varying lifetime (mass) are overlaid for comparison. Included are the theoretical expectations from higgsino production for each mass hypothesis, calculated from a GMSB SUSY model that assumes nearly degenerate $\tilde\chi^0_1$, $\tilde\chi^\pm_1$, and $\tilde\chi^0_2$.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass (left) and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime (right), for the different decay modes of $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$) = 1 (top) and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 (bottom). For the limits as a function of mass (lifetime), several signal models with varying lifetime (mass) are overlaid for comparison. Included are the theoretical expectations from higgsino production for each mass hypothesis, calculated from a GMSB SUSY model that assumes nearly degenerate $\tilde\chi^0_1$, $\tilde\chi^\pm_1$, and $\tilde\chi^0_2$.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass (left) and $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime (right), for the different decay modes of $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$) = 1 (top) and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 (bottom). For the limits as a function of mass (lifetime), several signal models with varying lifetime (mass) are overlaid for comparison. Included are the theoretical expectations from higgsino production for each mass hypothesis, calculated from a GMSB SUSY model that assumes nearly degenerate $\tilde\chi^0_1$, $\tilde\chi^\pm_1$, and $\tilde\chi^0_2$.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ branching ratio to the SM Higgs boson, where the assumed cross-section is for higgsino production, and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 - $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$). Several signal hypotheses are overlaid that are labelled by the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass, all with a fixed $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime of 2 ns.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ branching ratio to the SM Higgs boson, where the assumed cross-section is for higgsino production, and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 - $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$). Several signal hypotheses are overlaid that are labelled by the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass, all with a fixed $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime of 2 ns.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ branching ratio to the SM Higgs boson, where the assumed cross-section is for higgsino production, and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 - $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$). Several signal hypotheses are overlaid that are labelled by the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass, all with a fixed $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime of 2 ns.
The 95% CL limits on $\sigma(pp \rightarrow \tilde\chi^0_1 \tilde\chi^0_1$) in fb as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ branching ratio to the SM Higgs boson, where the assumed cross-section is for higgsino production, and $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow Z +\tilde{G}$) = 1 - $\mathcal{B}$($\tilde\chi^0_1$ $\rightarrow H + \tilde{G}$). Several signal hypotheses are overlaid that are labelled by the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass, all with a fixed $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime of 2 ns.
The 95% CL exclusion limits on the target signal hypothesis, for $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime in ns as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass in GeV. The overlaid curves correspond to different decay hypotheses, where the assumed cross-section is for higgsino production, and the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ or $Z + \tilde{G}$ such that $\mathcal{B}(H + \tilde{G}) + \mathcal{B}(Z + \tilde{G})$ = 100%. The curve shown in red represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $Z + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio. The curve shown in blue represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio.
The 95% CL exclusion limits on the target signal hypothesis, for $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime in ns as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass in GeV. The overlaid curves correspond to different decay hypotheses, where the assumed cross-section is for higgsino production, and the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ or $Z + \tilde{G}$ such that $\mathcal{B}(H + \tilde{G}) + \mathcal{B}(Z + \tilde{G})$ = 100%. The curve shown in red represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $Z + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio. The curve shown in blue represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio.
The 95% CL exclusion limits on the target signal hypothesis, for $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime in ns as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass in GeV. The overlaid curves correspond to different decay hypotheses, where the assumed cross-section is for higgsino production, and the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ or $Z + \tilde{G}$ such that $\mathcal{B}(H + \tilde{G}) + \mathcal{B}(Z + \tilde{G})$ = 100%. The curve shown in red represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $Z + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio. The curve shown in blue represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio.
The 95% CL exclusion limits on the target signal hypothesis, for $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime in ns as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass in GeV. The overlaid curves correspond to different decay hypotheses, where the assumed cross-section is for higgsino production, and the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ or $Z + \tilde{G}$ such that $\mathcal{B}(H + \tilde{G}) + \mathcal{B}(Z + \tilde{G})$ = 100%. The curve shown in red represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $Z + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio. The curve shown in blue represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio.
The 95% CL exclusion limits on the target signal hypothesis, for $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime in ns as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass in GeV. The overlaid curves correspond to different decay hypotheses, where the assumed cross-section is for higgsino production, and the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ or $Z + \tilde{G}$ such that $\mathcal{B}(H + \tilde{G}) + \mathcal{B}(Z + \tilde{G})$ = 100%. The curve shown in red represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $Z + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio. The curve shown in blue represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio.
The 95% CL exclusion limits on the target signal hypothesis, for $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime in ns as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass in GeV. The overlaid curves correspond to different decay hypotheses, where the assumed cross-section is for higgsino production, and the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ or $Z + \tilde{G}$ such that $\mathcal{B}(H + \tilde{G}) + \mathcal{B}(Z + \tilde{G})$ = 100%. The curve shown in red represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $Z + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio. The curve shown in blue represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio.
The 95% CL exclusion limits on the target signal hypothesis, for $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime in ns as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass in GeV. The overlaid curves correspond to different decay hypotheses, where the assumed cross-section is for higgsino production, and the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ or $Z + \tilde{G}$ such that $\mathcal{B}(H + \tilde{G}) + \mathcal{B}(Z + \tilde{G})$ = 100%. The curve shown in red represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $Z + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio. The curve shown in blue represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio.
The 95% CL exclusion limits on the target signal hypothesis, for $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime in ns as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass in GeV. The overlaid curves correspond to different decay hypotheses, where the assumed cross-section is for higgsino production, and the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ or $Z + \tilde{G}$ such that $\mathcal{B}(H + \tilde{G}) + \mathcal{B}(Z + \tilde{G})$ = 100%. The curve shown in red represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $Z + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio. The curve shown in blue represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio.
The 95% CL exclusion limits on the target signal hypothesis, for $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime in ns as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass in GeV. The overlaid curves correspond to different decay hypotheses, where the assumed cross-section is for higgsino production, and the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ or $Z + \tilde{G}$ such that $\mathcal{B}(H + \tilde{G}) + \mathcal{B}(Z + \tilde{G})$ = 100%. The curve shown in red represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $Z + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio. The curve shown in blue represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio.
The 95% CL exclusion limits on the target signal hypothesis, for $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime in ns as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass in GeV. The overlaid curves correspond to different decay hypotheses, where the assumed cross-section is for higgsino production, and the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ or $Z + \tilde{G}$ such that $\mathcal{B}(H + \tilde{G}) + \mathcal{B}(Z + \tilde{G})$ = 100%. The curve shown in red represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $Z + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio. The curve shown in blue represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio.
The 95% CL exclusion limits on the target signal hypothesis, for $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime in ns as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass in GeV. The overlaid curves correspond to different decay hypotheses, where the assumed cross-section is for higgsino production, and the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ or $Z + \tilde{G}$ such that $\mathcal{B}(H + \tilde{G}) + \mathcal{B}(Z + \tilde{G})$ = 100%. The curve shown in red represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $Z + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio. The curve shown in blue represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio.
The 95% CL exclusion limits on the target signal hypothesis, for $\tilde\chi^0_1$ lifetime in ns as a function of $\tilde\chi^0_1$ mass in GeV. The overlaid curves correspond to different decay hypotheses, where the assumed cross-section is for higgsino production, and the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ or $Z + \tilde{G}$ such that $\mathcal{B}(H + \tilde{G}) + \mathcal{B}(Z + \tilde{G})$ = 100%. The curve shown in red represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $Z + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio. The curve shown in blue represents the decay hypothesis where the $\tilde\chi^0_1$ decays to $H + \tilde{G}$ with 100% branching ratio.
Cutflow for an example higgsino signal with mass 225 GeV and lifetime 10 ns, in the H decay mode. Acceptance is defined at truth level, and efficiency compares the events passing at reconstruction level with respect to truth.
Cutflow for an example higgsino signal with mass 225 GeV and lifetime 10 ns, in the Z decay mode. Acceptance is defined at truth level, and efficiency compares the events passing at reconstruction level with respect to truth.
Cutflow for an example higgsino signal with mass 225 GeV and lifetime 2 ns, in the H decay mode. Acceptance is defined at truth level, and efficiency compares the events passing at reconstruction level with respect to truth.
Cutflow for an example higgsino signal with mass 225 GeV and lifetime 2 ns, in the Z decay mode. Acceptance is defined at truth level, and efficiency compares the events passing at reconstruction level with respect to truth.
Acceptance across the H decay mode signal grid, calculated using truth information. The selection applied corresponds to the model-independent signal region (i.e. the standard SR with $t_{\text{avg}$ > 0.9 ns).
Acceptance across the Z decay mode signal grid, calculated using truth information. The selection applied corresponds to the model-independent signal region (i.e. the standard SR with $t_{\text{avg}$ > 0.9 ns).
Efficiency across the H decay mode signal grid, calculated using reco information. The selection applied corresponds to the model-independent signal region (i.e. the standard SR with $t_{\text{avg}$ > 0.9 ns). Here, the numerator is the signal yield passing the reco selection and the denominator is the signal yield passing the truth selection.
Efficiency across the Z decay mode signal grid, calculated using reco information. The selection applied corresponds to the model-independent signal region (i.e. the standard SR with $t_{\text{avg}$ > 0.9 ns). Here, the numerator is the signal yield passing the reco selection and the denominator is the signal yield passing the truth selection.
A search for new phenomena in final states with hadronically decaying tau leptons, $b$-jets, and missing transverse momentum is presented. The analyzed dataset comprises $pp$~collision data at a center-of-mass energy of $\sqrt s = 13$ TeV with an integrated luminosity of 139/fb, delivered by the Large Hadron Collider and recorded with the ATLAS detector from 2015 to 2018. The observed data are compatible with the expected Standard Model background. The results are interpreted in simplified models for two different scenarios. The first model is based on supersymmetry and considers pair production of top squarks, each of which decays into a $b$-quark, a neutrino and a tau slepton. Each tau slepton in turn decays into a tau lepton and a nearly massless gravitino. Within this model, top-squark masses up to 1.4 TeV can be excluded at the 95% confidence level over a wide range of tau-slepton masses. The second model considers pair production of leptoquarks with decays into third-generation leptons and quarks. Depending on the branching fraction into charged leptons, leptoquarks with masses up to around 1.25 TeV can be excluded at the 95% confidence level for the case of scalar leptoquarks and up to 1.8 TeV (1.5 TeV) for vector leptoquarks in a Yang--Mills (minimal-coupling) scenario. In addition, model-independent upper limits are set on the cross section of processes beyond the Standard Model.
Relative systematic uncertainties in the estimated number of background events in the signal regions. In the lower part of the table, a breakdown of the total uncertainty into different categories is given. For the multi-bin SR, the breakdown refers to the integral over all three $p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$ bins. As the individual uncertainties are correlated, they do not add in quadrature to equal the total background uncertainty.
Distributions of $m_{\text{T}2}(\tau_{1},\tau_{2})$ in the di-tau SR. The stacked histograms show the various SM background contributions. The hatched band indicates the total statistical and systematic uncertainty of the SM background. The $t\bar{t}$ (2 real $\tau$) and $t\bar{t}$ (1 real $\tau$) as well as the single-top background contributions are scaled with the normalization factors obtained from the background-only fit. Minor backgrounds are grouped together and denoted as 'Other'. This includes $t\bar{t}$-fake, single top, and other top (di-tau channel) or $t\bar{t}$-fake, $t\bar{t}+H$, multiboson, and other top (single-tau channel). The overlaid dotted lines show the additional contributions for signal scenarios close to the expected exclusion contour with the particle type and the mass and $\beta$ parameters for the simplified models indicated in the legend. For the leptoquark signal model the shapes of the distributions for $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$ and $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ (not shown) are similar to that of $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The rightmost bin includes the overflow.
Distributions of $E_{\text{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ in the di-tau SR. The stacked histograms show the various SM background contributions. The hatched band indicates the total statistical and systematic uncertainty of the SM background. The $t\bar{t}$ (2 real $\tau$) and $t\bar{t}$ (1 real $\tau$) as well as the single-top background contributions are scaled with the normalization factors obtained from the background-only fit. Minor backgrounds are grouped together and denoted as 'Other'. This includes $t\bar{t}$-fake, single top, and other top (di-tau channel) or $t\bar{t}$-fake, $t\bar{t}+H$, multiboson, and other top (single-tau channel). The overlaid dotted lines show the additional contributions for signal scenarios close to the expected exclusion contour with the particle type and the mass and $\beta$ parameters for the simplified models indicated in the legend. For the leptoquark signal model the shapes of the distributions for $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$ and $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ (not shown) are similar to that of $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The rightmost bin includes the overflow.
Distributions of $s_{\text{T}}$ in the single-tau one-bin SR. The stacked histograms show the various SM background contributions. The hatched band indicates the total statistical and systematic uncertainty of the SM background. The $t\bar{t}$ (2 real $\tau$) and $t\bar{t}$ (1 real $\tau$) as well as the single-top background contributions are scaled with the normalization factors obtained from the background-only fit. Minor backgrounds are grouped together and denoted as 'Other'. This includes $t\bar{t}$-fake, single top, and other top (di-tau channel) or $t\bar{t}$-fake, $t\bar{t}+H$, multiboson, and other top (single-tau channel). The overlaid dotted lines show the additional contributions for signal scenarios close to the expected exclusion contour with the particle type and the mass and $\beta$ parameters for the simplified models indicated in the legend. For the leptoquark signal model the shapes of the distributions for $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$ and $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ (not shown) are similar to that of $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The rightmost bin includes the overflow.
Distributions of $m_{\text{T}}(\tau)$ in the single-tau one-bin SR. The stacked histograms show the various SM background contributions. The hatched band indicates the total statistical and systematic uncertainty of the SM background. The $t\bar{t}$ (2 real $\tau$) and $t\bar{t}$ (1 real $\tau$) as well as the single-top background contributions are scaled with the normalization factors obtained from the background-only fit. Minor backgrounds are grouped together and denoted as 'Other'. This includes $t\bar{t}$-fake, single top, and other top (di-tau channel) or $t\bar{t}$-fake, $t\bar{t}+H$, multiboson, and other top (single-tau channel). The overlaid dotted lines show the additional contributions for signal scenarios close to the expected exclusion contour with the particle type and the mass and $\beta$ parameters for the simplified models indicated in the legend. For the leptoquark signal model the shapes of the distributions for $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$ and $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ (not shown) are similar to that of $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The rightmost bin includes the overflow.
Distributions of $\Sigma m_{\text{T}}(b_{1,2})$ in the single-tau $p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$-binned SR. The stacked histograms show the various SM background contributions. The hatched band indicates the total statistical and systematic uncertainty of the SM background. The $t\bar{t}$ (2 real $\tau$) and $t\bar{t}$ (1 real $\tau$) as well as the single-top background contributions are scaled with the normalization factors obtained from the background-only fit. Minor backgrounds are grouped together and denoted as 'Other'. This includes $t\bar{t}$-fake, single top, and other top (di-tau channel) or $t\bar{t}$-fake, $t\bar{t}+H$, multiboson, and other top (single-tau channel). The overlaid dotted lines show the additional contributions for signal scenarios close to the expected exclusion contour with the particle type and the mass and $\beta$ parameters for the simplified models indicated in the legend. For the leptoquark signal model the shapes of the distributions for $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$ and $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ (not shown) are similar to that of $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The rightmost bin includes the overflow.
Distributions of $p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$ in the single-tau $p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$-binned SR. The stacked histograms show the various SM background contributions. The hatched band indicates the total statistical and systematic uncertainty of the SM background. The $t\bar{t}$ (2 real $\tau$) and $t\bar{t}$ (1 real $\tau$) as well as the single-top background contributions are scaled with the normalization factors obtained from the background-only fit. Minor backgrounds are grouped together and denoted as 'Other'. This includes $t\bar{t}$-fake, single top, and other top (di-tau channel) or $t\bar{t}$-fake, $t\bar{t}+H$, multiboson, and other top (single-tau channel). The overlaid dotted lines show the additional contributions for signal scenarios close to the expected exclusion contour with the particle type and the mass and $\beta$ parameters for the simplified models indicated in the legend. For the leptoquark signal model the shapes of the distributions for $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$ and $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ (not shown) are similar to that of $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The rightmost bin includes the overflow.
Expected and observed exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the vector third-generation leptoquark signal model, as a function of the mass $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}})$ and the branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ into a quark and a charged lepton. The plot shows the exclusion contour for the minimal-coupling scenario. The limits are derived from the binned single-tau signal region.
Expected and observed exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the vector third-generation leptoquark signal model, as a function of the mass $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}})$ and the branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ into a quark and a charged lepton. The plot shows the exclusion contour for the minimal-coupling scenario. The limits are derived from the binned single-tau signal region.
Expected and observed exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the vector third-generation leptoquark signal model, as a function of the mass $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}})$ and the branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ into a quark and a charged lepton. The plot shows the exclusion contour for vector leptoquarks with additional gauge couplings. The limits are derived from the binned single-tau signal region.
Expected and observed exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the vector third-generation leptoquark signal model, as a function of the mass $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}})$ and the branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ into a quark and a charged lepton. The plot shows the exclusion contour for vector leptoquarks with additional gauge couplings. The limits are derived from the binned single-tau signal region.
Exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the stop-stau signal model as a function of the masses of the top squark $m(\tilde{t}_{1})$ and of the tau slepton $m(\tilde{\tau}_{1})$. Expected and observed limits are shown for the present search in comparison to observed limits from previous ATLAS analyses based on data from Run-1 of the LHC at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV [Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016)] and on a partial dataset from Run 2 at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV [Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 032008]. The green band indicates the limit on the mass of the tau slepton (for a massless LSP) from the LEP experiments.
Exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the stop-stau signal model as a function of the masses of the top squark $m(\tilde{t}_{1})$ and of the tau slepton $m(\tilde{\tau}_{1})$. Expected and observed limits are shown for the present search in comparison to observed limits from previous ATLAS analyses based on data from Run-1 of the LHC at $\sqrt{s} = 8$ TeV [Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016)] and on a partial dataset from Run 2 at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV [Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) 032008]. The green band indicates the limit on the mass of the tau slepton (for a massless LSP) from the LEP experiments.
Expected and observed exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the scalar third-generation leptoquark signal model, as a function of the mass $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}})$ and the branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow q\ell)$ into a quark and a charged lepton. The plot shows the exclusion contour for up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}})$ with charge $+2/3e$. The limits are derived from the binned single-tau signal region. Shown in gray for comparison are the observed exclusion-limit contours from the previous ATLAS publication that targets the same leptoquark models but is based on a subset of the Run-2 data [JHEP 06 (2019) 144]. In this previous publication five different analyses are considered that target not only the final state studied here but also the final states that correspond to a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow q\ell)$ of 0 or 1, leading to the concave shapes of the gray exclusion contours.
Expected and observed exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the scalar third-generation leptoquark signal model, as a function of the mass $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}})$ and the branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow q\ell)$ into a quark and a charged lepton. The plot shows the exclusion contour for up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}})$ with charge $+2/3e$. The limits are derived from the binned single-tau signal region. Shown in gray for comparison are the observed exclusion-limit contours from the previous ATLAS publication that targets the same leptoquark models but is based on a subset of the Run-2 data [JHEP 06 (2019) 144]. In this previous publication five different analyses are considered that target not only the final state studied here but also the final states that correspond to a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow q\ell)$ of 0 or 1, leading to the concave shapes of the gray exclusion contours.
Expected and observed exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the scalar third-generation leptoquark signal model, as a function of the mass $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}})$ and the branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow q\ell)$ into a quark and a charged lepton. The plot shows the exclusion contour for down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}})$ with charge $-1/3e$. The limits are derived from the binned single-tau signal region. Shown in gray for comparison are the observed exclusion-limit contours from the previous ATLAS publication that targets the same leptoquark models but is based on a subset of the Run-2 data [JHEP 06 (2019) 144]. In this previous publication five different analyses are considered that target not only the final state studied here but also the final states that correspond to a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow q\ell)$ of 0 or 1, leading to the concave shapes of the gray exclusion contours.
Expected and observed exclusion contours at the 95% confidence level for the scalar third-generation leptoquark signal model, as a function of the mass $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}})$ and the branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow q\ell)$ into a quark and a charged lepton. The plot shows the exclusion contour for down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}})$ with charge $-1/3e$. The limits are derived from the binned single-tau signal region. Shown in gray for comparison are the observed exclusion-limit contours from the previous ATLAS publication that targets the same leptoquark models but is based on a subset of the Run-2 data [JHEP 06 (2019) 144]. In this previous publication five different analyses are considered that target not only the final state studied here but also the final states that correspond to a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow q\ell)$ of 0 or 1, leading to the concave shapes of the gray exclusion contours.
Upper limits on the signal cross section at the 95 % confidence level for the stop-stau signal model.
Upper limits on the signal cross section at the 95 % confidence level for the scalar third-generation leptoquark signal model with up-type leptoquarks.
Upper limits on the signal cross section at the 95 % confidence level for the scalar third-generation leptoquark signal model with down-type leptoquarks.
Upper limits on the signal cross section at the 95 % confidence level for the vector third-generation leptoquark signal model with minimal coupling (MC).
Upper limits on the signal cross section at the 95 % confidence level for the vector third-generation leptoquark signal model with additional gauge couplings (YM).
Acceptance of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$.
Efficiency of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$.
Efficiency of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$.
Efficiency of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$.
Efficiency of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$.
Efficiency of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of up-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$.
Efficiency of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow t\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$.
Efficiency of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow t\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$.
Efficiency of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow t\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$.
Efficiency of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow t\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$.
Efficiency of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of down-type leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}$. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}} \rightarrow t\tau)$ of 0 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario.
Efficiency of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario.
Efficiency of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario.
Efficiency of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario.
Efficiency of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario.
Efficiency of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ in the minimal-coupling scenario. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings.
Efficiency of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings.
Efficiency of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings.
Efficiency of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings.
Efficiency of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 or 1 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings.
Efficiency of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of vector leptoquarks $\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}$ with additional gauge couplings. The plot does not show efficiencies for a branching fraction $B(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}} \rightarrow b\tau)$ of 0 because here the acceptance at generator level becomes zero and the efficiency is thus undefined.
Acceptance of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.
Efficiency of the one-bin signal region of the single-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.
Acceptance of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.
Efficiency of the first bin of the multi-bin signal region (50 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 100 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.
Acceptance of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.
Efficiency of the middle bin of the multi-bin signal region (100 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau) <$ 200 GeV) of the single-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.
Acceptance of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.
Efficiency of the last bin of the multi-bin signal region (200 GeV $< p_{\text{T}}(\tau)$) of the single-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.
Acceptance of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.
Efficiency of the signal region of the di-tau channel for pair production of top squarks with decays via tau sleptons.
Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\tilde{t}_{1}) = 1350$ GeV, $m(\tilde{\tau}_{1}) = 1090$ GeV for the di-tau SR. The simulated sample contains 30,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the di-tau channel.
Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\tilde{t}_{1}) = 1350$ GeV, $m(\tilde{\tau}_{1}) = 1090$ GeV for the single-tau one-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 30,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.
Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\tilde{t}_{1}) = 1350$ GeV, $m(\tilde{\tau}_{1}) = 1090$ GeV for the single-tau multi-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 30,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.
Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}) = 1.2$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ for the di-tau SR. The simulated sample contains 210,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the di-tau channel.
Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}) = 1.2$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ for the single-tau one-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 210,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.
Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{u}}) = 1.2$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ for the single-tau multi-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 210,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.
Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}) = 1.2$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ for the di-tau SR. The simulated sample contains 210,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the di-tau channel.
Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}) = 1.2$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ for the single-tau one-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 210,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.
Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{d}}) = 1.2$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ for the single-tau multi-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 210,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.
Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}) = 1.4$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ in the minimal-coupling scenario for the di-tau SR. The simulated sample contains 50,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the di-tau channel.
Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}) = 1.4$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ in the minimal-coupling scenario for the single-tau one-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 50,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.
Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}) = 1.4$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ in the minimal-coupling scenario for the single-tau multi-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 50,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.
Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}) = 1.4$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ in the Yang--Mills scenario for the di-tau SR. The simulated sample contains 50,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the di-tau channel.
Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}) = 1.4$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ in the Yang--Mills scenario for the single-tau one-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 50,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.
Cutflow for the benchmark signal model $m(\text{LQ}_{3}^{\text{v}}) = 1.4$ TeV, $\beta = 0.5$ in the Yang--Mills scenario for the single-tau multi-bin SR. The simulated sample contains 50,000 raw MC events. Weighted event yields are reported, normalized to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. 'Preselection' refers to the preselection for the single-tau channel.
This paper presents a measurement of the electroweak production of two jets in association with a $Z\gamma$ pair, with the $Z$ boson decaying into two neutrinos. It also presents a search for invisible or partially invisible decays of a Higgs boson with a mass of 125 GeV produced through vector-boson fusion with a photon in the final state. These results use data from LHC proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV collected with the ATLAS detector and corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The event signature, shared by all benchmark processes considered for the measurements and searches, is characterized by a significant amount of unbalanced transverse momentum and a photon in the final state, in addition to a pair of forward jets. Electroweak $Z\gamma$ production in association with two jets is observed in this final state with a significance of 5.2 (5.1 expected) standard deviations. The measured fiducial cross-section for this process is 1.31$\pm$0.29 fb. An observed (expected) upper limit of 0.37 ($0.34^{+0.15}_{-0.10}$) at 95% confidence level is set on the branching ratio of a 125 GeV Higgs boson to invisible particles, assuming the Standard Model production cross-section. The signature is also interpreted in the context of decays of a Higgs boson into a photon and a dark photon. An observed (expected) 95% CL upper limit on the branching ratio for this decay is set at 0.018 ($0.017^{+0.007}_{-0.005}$), assuming the Standard Model production cross-section for a 125 GeV Higgs boson.
Post-fit results for all $m_\text{jj}$ SR and CR bins in the EW $Z \gamma + \text{jets}$ cross-section measurement with the $\mu_{Z \gamma_\text{EW}}$ signal normalization floating. The post-fit uncertainties include statistical, experimental, and theory contributions.
Post-fit results for all DNN SR and CR bins in the search for $H \to \text{inv.}$ with the $\mathcal{B}_\text{inv}$ signal normalization set to zero. For the $Z_\text{Rev.Cen.}^\gamma$ CR, the third bin contains all events with DNN output score values of 0.6-1.0. The $H \to \text{inv.}$ signal is scaled to a $\mathcal{B}_\text{inv}$ of 37%. The post-fit uncertainties include statistical, experimental, and theoretical contributions.
Post-fit results for the ten [$m_\text{jj}$, $m_\text{T}$] bins constituting the SR and CRs defined for the dark photon search with the $\mathcal{B}(H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d})$ signal normalization set to zero. A $H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d}$ signal is shown for two different mass hypotheses (125 GeV, 500 GeV) and scaled to a branching ratio of 2% and 1%, respectively. The post-fit uncertainties include statistical, experimental, and theoretical contributions.
Post-fit $m_\text{T}(\gamma, E_\text{T}^\text{miss})$ distribution in the inclusive signal region for the dark-photon search with the 125 GeV mass $\mathcal{B}(H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d})$ signal normalization set to zero. A $H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d}$ decay signal is shown for two different mass hypotheses, 125 GeV and 500 GeV, and scaled to a $\mathcal{B}(H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d})$ of 2% and 1%, respectively. Events with $m_\text{T}(\gamma, E_\text{T}^\text{miss})$ larger than the rightmost bin boundary are added to that bin.
The 95% CL upper limit on the Higgs boson production cross-section times branching ratio to $\gamma \gamma_\text{d}$ is shown for different VBF-produced scalar-mediator-mass hypotheses in the NWA. The theoretically predicted cross-section of a Higgs boson produced via VBF and with the $\mathcal{B}(H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d}) =$ 5% is superimposed on the $\pm 1\sigma$ and $\pm 2\sigma$ NNLO QCD + NLO EW uncertainty band of the expected production cross-section limit.
Post-fit $m_\text{jj}$ distribution in the inclusive signal region. The Higgs boson invisible decay signal is scaled to a $\mathcal{B}_\text{inv}$ of 37%. Events with $m_\text{jj}$ larger than the rightmost bin boundary are added to that bin.
Post-fit $m_\text{jj}$ distribution in the one-lepton control region $W_{\ell \nu}^\gamma$ CR. Events with $m_\text{jj}$ larger than the rightmost bin boundary are added to that bin.
Post-fit $m_\text{T}$ distribution in the one lepton control region. Events with $m_\text{T}$ larger than the rightmost bin boundary are added to that bin.
Post-fit photon centrality distribution in the zero lepton signal plus control region with the $\mathcal{B}_\text{inv}$ signal normalization set to zero in the fit.
Post-fit photon $E_\text{T}$ distribution in the zero lepton signal region with the $\mathcal{B}_\text{inv}$ signal normalization set to zero in the fit.
Post-fit photon centrality distribution in the zero lepton signal plus control region resulting from the fit to the $m_\text{jj}$ distribution for EW $Z \gamma + \text{jets}$. The post-fit uncertainties include statistical, experimental, and theory contributions.
Post-fit photon $E_\text{T}$ distribution in the zero lepton signal region resulting from the fit to the $m_\text{jj}$ distribution for EW $Z \gamma + \text{jets}$. The post-fit uncertainties include statistical, experimental, and theory contributions.
Post-fit DNN output score distribution in the one lepton control region.
Yields for the EW $Z \gamma + \text{jets}$ process are shown after each selection along with relative and absolute signal acceptance efficiencies.
Yields for the 125 GeV Higgs boson with $\mathcal{B}_\text{inv.} =$ 1 signal produced by the vector boson fusion process in association with a final state photon are shown after each selection along with relative and absolute signal acceptance efficiencies.
Yields for the 125 GeV Higgs boson with $\mathcal{B}(H \to \gamma \gamma_\text{d}) =$ 1 signal produced by the vector boson fusion process are shown after each selection along with relative and absolute signal acceptance efficiencies.
A search is made for a vector-like $T$ quark decaying into a Higgs boson and a top quark in 13 TeV proton-proton collisions using the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider with a data sample corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The Higgs-boson and top-quark candidates are identified in the all-hadronic decay mode, where $H\to b\bar{b}$ and $t\to b W \to b q \bar{q}^\prime$ are reconstructed as large-radius jets. The candidate Higgs boson, top quark, and associated B-hadrons are identified using tagging algorithms. No significant excess is observed above the background, so limits are set on the production cross-section of a singlet $T$ quark at 95% confidence level, depending on the mass, $m_T$, and coupling, $\kappa_T$, of the vector-like $T$ quark to Standard Model particles. In the considered mass range between 1.0 and 2.3 TeV, the upper limit on the allowed coupling values increases with $m_T$ from a minimum value of 0.35 for 1.07 < $m_T$ < 1.4 TeV to 1.6 for $m_T$ = 2.3 TeV.
Dijet invariant mass distribution for the $SR$ showing the results of the model when fitted to the data. A $T$-quark hypothesis with $m_{T} = 1.6$ TeV and $\kappa_{T} = 0.5$ is used in the fit.
Dijet invariant mass distribution for the $ttNR$ showing the results of the model when fitted to the data. A $T$-quark hypothesis with $m_{T} = 1.6$ TeV and $\kappa_{T} = 0.5$ is used in the fit.
Observed and expected 95% CL upper limits on the single $T$-quark coupling $\kappa_{T}$ as a function of $m_{T}$ are shown.
Observed and expected 95% CL lower limits on the $T$-quark mass as a function of the $T$-quark width-to-mass ratio and the branching fraction of the $T \rightarrow Ht$ decay ($\Gamma_{T}$ is the $T$-quark width).
Cutflow table listing the number of events passing each criterion for a $T$-quark hypothesis with a mass of 1.6 TeV and $\kappa_{T} = 0.5$. The initial signal event yield is the predicted number of $T$-quark events inclusive in the Higgs-boson and top-quark decays for 139 fb$^{-1}$.
Observed 95% CL upper limits on the single $T$-quark production cross-section as a function of the $T$-quark coupling $\kappa_{T}$ and $m_{T}$.
Expected 95% CL upper limits on the single $T$-quark production cross-section as a function of the $T$-quark coupling $\kappa_{T}$ and $m_{T}$.
Observed and expected 95% CL lower limits on the $T$-quark mass as a function of the $T$-quark width-to-mass ratio and the branching fraction of the $T \rightarrow Wb$ decay ($\Gamma_{T}$ is the $T$-quark width).
A search for chargino$-$neutralino pair production in three-lepton final states with missing transverse momentum is presented. The study is based on a dataset of $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV $pp$ collisions recorded with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. No significant excess relative to the Standard Model predictions is found in data. The results are interpreted in simplified models of supersymmetry, and statistically combined with results from a previous ATLAS search for compressed spectra in two-lepton final states. Various scenarios for the production and decay of charginos ($\tilde\chi^\pm_1$) and neutralinos ($\tilde\chi^0_2$) are considered. For pure higgsino $\tilde\chi^\pm_1\tilde\chi^0_2$ pair-production scenarios, exclusion limits at 95% confidence level are set on $\tilde\chi^0_2$ masses up to 210 GeV. Limits are also set for pure wino $\tilde\chi^\pm_1\tilde\chi^0_2$ pair production, on $\tilde\chi^0_2$ masses up to 640 GeV for decays via on-shell $W$ and $Z$ bosons, up to 300 GeV for decays via off-shell $W$ and $Z$ bosons, and up to 190 GeV for decays via $W$ and Standard Model Higgs bosons.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the CRs (pre-fit) and VRs (post-fit) of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. The bottom panel shows the relative difference between the observed data and expected yields for the CRs and the significance of the difference for the VRs, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the CRs (pre-fit) and VRs (post-fit) of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. The bottom panel shows the relative difference between the observed data and expected yields for the CRs and the significance of the difference for the VRs, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the CRs and VRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the CRs and VRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in the SRs for the onshell $W\!Z$ selection. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample are extracted separately for the 0j, low-H<sub>T</sub> and high-H<sub>T</sub> regions, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in the SRs for the onshell $W\!Z$ selection. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample are extracted separately for the 0j, low-H<sub>T</sub> and high-H<sub>T</sub> regions, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in the SRs for the $W\!h$ selection. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample are extracted separately for the 0j, low-H<sub>T</sub> and high-H<sub>T</sub> regions, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, tt̄+X and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in the SRs for the $W\!h$ selection. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample are extracted separately for the 0j, low-H<sub>T</sub> and high-H<sub>T</sub> regions, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, tt̄+X and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the SRs of the $W\!h$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, tt̄+X and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the SRs of the $W\!h$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, tt̄+X and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample extracted separately for 0j and nj, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample extracted separately for 0j and nj, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample extracted separately for 0j and nj, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>. The normalization factors of the $W\!Z$ sample extracted separately for 0j and nj, and are treated separately in the combined fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W^{*}\!Z^{*}$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "Others" category contains the single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W^{*}\!Z^{*}$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR<sub>OS,near</sub> distribution in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p<sub>T</sub> in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-2, and the (c) E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> and (d) m<sub>T</sub> distributions in SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> (with all SR-i bins of SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR<sub>OS,near</sub> distribution in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p<sub>T</sub> in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-2, and the (c) E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> and (d) m<sub>T</sub> distributions in SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> (with all SR-i bins of SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR<sub>OS,near</sub> distribution in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p<sub>T</sub> in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-2, and the (c) E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> and (d) m<sub>T</sub> distributions in SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> (with all SR-i bins of SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR<sub>OS,near</sub> distribution in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p<sub>T</sub> in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-2, and the (c) E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> and (d) m<sub>T</sub> distributions in SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> (with all SR-i bins of SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR<sub>OS,near</sub> distribution in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p<sub>T</sub> in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-2, and the (c) E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> and (d) m<sub>T</sub> distributions in SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> (with all SR-i bins of SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR<sub>OS,near</sub> distribution in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p<sub>T</sub> in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-2, and the (c) E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> and (d) m<sub>T</sub> distributions in SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> (with all SR-i bins of SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR<sub>OS,near</sub> distribution in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p<sub>T</sub> in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-2, and the (c) E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> and (d) m<sub>T</sub> distributions in SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> (with all SR-i bins of SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The figure shows (a) the ΔR<sub>OS,near</sub> distribution in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-1, (b) the 3rd leading lepton p<sub>T</sub> in SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub>-2, and the (c) E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> and (d) m<sub>T</sub> distributions in SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> (with all SR-i bins of SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub> summed up). The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes, except in the top panels, where triboson and Higgs production contributions are shown separately, and tt̄+X is merged into Others. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$/$W\!h$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m<sub>T</sub><sup>m<sub>ll</sub>min</sup> distribution in (a) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj and (c) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and the |p<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup>|/E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in (d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj. The contributing m<sub>ll</sub><sup>min</sup> mass bins within each SR<sup>offWZ</sup> category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m<sub>T</sub><sup>m<sub>ll</sub>min</sup> distribution in (a) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj and (c) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and the |p<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup>|/E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in (d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj. The contributing m<sub>ll</sub><sup>min</sup> mass bins within each SR<sup>offWZ</sup> category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m<sub>T</sub><sup>m<sub>ll</sub>min</sup> distribution in (a) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj and (c) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and the |p<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup>|/E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in (d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj. The contributing m<sub>ll</sub><sup>min</sup> mass bins within each SR<sup>offWZ</sup> category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m<sub>T</sub><sup>m<sub>ll</sub>min</sup> distribution in (a) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj and (c) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and the |p<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup>|/E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in (d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj. The contributing m<sub>ll</sub><sup>min</sup> mass bins within each SR<sup>offWZ</sup> category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m<sub>T</sub><sup>m<sub>ll</sub>min</sup> distribution in (a) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj and (c) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and the |p<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup>|/E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in (d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj. The contributing m<sub>ll</sub><sup>min</sup> mass bins within each SR<sup>offWZ</sup> category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m<sub>T</sub><sup>m<sub>ll</sub>min</sup> distribution in (a) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj and (c) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and the |p<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup>|/E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in (d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj. The contributing m<sub>ll</sub><sup>min</sup> mass bins within each SR<sup>offWZ</sup> category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m<sub>T</sub><sup>m<sub>ll</sub>min</sup> distribution in (a) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj and (c) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and the |p<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup>|/E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in (d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj. The contributing m<sub>ll</sub><sup>min</sup> mass bins within each SR<sup>offWZ</sup> category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Kinematic distributions after the background-only fit showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The figure shows the m<sub>T</sub><sup>m<sub>ll</sub>min</sup> distribution in (a) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj and (c) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and the |p<sub>T</sub><sup>lep</sup>|/E<sub>T</sub><sup>miss</sup> distribution in (d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj. The contributing m<sub>ll</sub><sup>min</sup> mass bins within each SR<sup>offWZ</sup> category are summed together. The SR selections are applied for each distribution, except for the variable shown, for which the selection is indicated by an arrow. The last bin includes overflow. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from single-top, WW, triboson, Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Observed (N<sub>obs</sub>) yields after the discovery-fit and expected (N<sub>exp</sub>) after the background-only fit, for the inclusive SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The third and fourth column list the 95 CL upper limits on the visible cross-section (σ<sub>vis</sub><sup>95</sup>) and on the number of signal events (S<sub>obs</sub><sup>95</sup>). The fifth column (S<sub>exp</sub><sup>95</sup>) shows the 95 CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number (and ± 1σ excursions on the expectation) of background events. The last two columns indicate the CLb value, i.e. the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis, and the discovery p-value (p(s = 0)). If the observed yield is below the expected yield, the p-value is capped at 0.5.
Observed (N<sub>obs</sub>) yields after the discovery-fit and expected (N<sub>exp</sub>) after the background-only fit, for the inclusive SRs of the onshell $W\!Z$ and $W\!h$ selections. The third and fourth column list the 95 CL upper limits on the visible cross-section (σ<sub>vis</sub><sup>95</sup>) and on the number of signal events (S<sub>obs</sub><sup>95</sup>). The fifth column (S<sub>exp</sub><sup>95</sup>) shows the 95 CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number (and ± 1σ excursions on the expectation) of background events. The last two columns indicate the CLb value, i.e. the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis, and the discovery p-value (p(s = 0)). If the observed yield is below the expected yield, the p-value is capped at 0.5.
Observed (N<sub>obs</sub>) yields after the discovery-fit and expected (N<sub>exp</sub>) after the background-only fit, for the inclusive SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The third and fourth column list the 95 CL upper limits on the visible cross section (σ<sub>vis</sub><sup>95</sup>) and on the number of signal events (S<sub>obs</sub><sup>95</sup>). The fifth column (S<sub>exp</sub><sup>95</sup>) shows the 95 CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number (and ± 1σ excursions on the expectation) of background events. The last two columns indicate the CLb value, i.e. the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis, and the discovery p-value (p(s = 0)). If the observed yield is below the expected yield, the p-value is capped at 0.5.
Observed (N<sub>obs</sub>) yields after the discovery-fit and expected (N<sub>exp</sub>) after the background-only fit, for the inclusive SRs of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection. The third and fourth column list the 95 CL upper limits on the visible cross section (σ<sub>vis</sub><sup>95</sup>) and on the number of signal events (S<sub>obs</sub><sup>95</sup>). The fifth column (S<sub>exp</sub><sup>95</sup>) shows the 95 CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number (and ± 1σ excursions on the expectation) of background events. The last two columns indicate the CLb value, i.e. the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis, and the discovery p-value (p(s = 0)). If the observed yield is below the expected yield, the p-value is capped at 0.5.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated models in the (a,b) wino/bino (+) scenario, (c) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (d) the higgsino scenario. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>exp</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties. The statistical combination of the onshell $W\!Z$, offshell $W\!Z$, and compressed results is shown as the main contour, while the observed (expected) limits for each individual selection are overlaid in green, blue, and orange solid (dashed) lines, respectively. The exclusion is shown projected (a) onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane or (b,c,d) onto the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs Δm plane. The light grey area denotes (top) the constraints obtained by the previous equivalent analysis in ATLAS using the 8 TeV 20.3 fb<sup>-1</sup> dataset [17], and (d) the LEP lower χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup> mass limit [56]. The pale blue line in the top right panel represents the mass splitting range that yields a dark matter relic density equal to the observed relic density, Ω h<sup>2</sup>=0.1186±0.0020 [172], when the mass parameters of all the decoupled SUSY partners are set to 5 TeV and tanβ is chosen such that the SM-like Higgs boson mass is consistent with the observed value [43]. The area above (below) the blue line represents a dark-matter relic density larger (smaller) than the observed.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$med in the wino/bino (+) scenario, calculated using the $W\!h$ SRs and projected onto the m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>, χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>) vs m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) plane. The expected 95 CL sensitivity (dashed black line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>{exp}</sub> (yellow band) from experimental systematic uncertainties and statistical uncertainties on the data yields, the observed limit (red solid line) is shown with ±1σ<sub>theory</sub> (dotted red lines) from signal cross-section uncertainties.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the CRs and VRs of the RJR selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Comparison of the observed data and expected SM background yields in the CRs and VRs of the RJR selection. The SM prediction is taken from the background-only fit. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. The hatched band indicates the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. The bottom panel shows the significance of the difference between the observed and expected yields, calculated with the profile likelihood method from [169], adding a minus sign if the yield is below the prediction.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in the SRs for the RJR selection. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Observed and expected yields after the background-only fit in the SRs for the RJR selection. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Combined statistical and systematic uncertainties are presented.
Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p<sub>T</sub><sup>ℓ<sub>1</sub></sup> and (b) H<sup>PP</sup><sub>3,1</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p<sup>CM</sup><sub>T ISR</sub> and (d) R<sub>ISR</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p<sub>T</sub><sup>ℓ<sub>1</sub></sup> and (b) H<sup>PP</sup><sub>3,1</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p<sup>CM</sup><sub>T ISR</sub> and (d) R<sub>ISR</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p<sub>T</sub><sup>ℓ<sub>1</sub></sup> and (b) H<sup>PP</sup><sub>3,1</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p<sup>CM</sup><sub>T ISR</sub> and (d) R<sub>ISR</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p<sub>T</sub><sup>ℓ<sub>1</sub></sup> and (b) H<sup>PP</sup><sub>3,1</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p<sup>CM</sup><sub>T ISR</sub> and (d) R<sub>ISR</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p<sub>T</sub><sup>ℓ<sub>1</sub></sup> and (b) H<sup>PP</sup><sub>3,1</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p<sup>CM</sup><sub>T ISR</sub> and (d) R<sub>ISR</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p<sub>T</sub><sup>ℓ<sub>1</sub></sup> and (b) H<sup>PP</sup><sub>3,1</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p<sup>CM</sup><sub>T ISR</sub> and (d) R<sub>ISR</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p<sub>T</sub><sup>ℓ<sub>1</sub></sup> and (b) H<sup>PP</sup><sub>3,1</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p<sup>CM</sup><sub>T ISR</sub> and (d) R<sub>ISR</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
Example of kinematic distributions after the background-only fit, showing the data and the post-fit expected background, in regions of the RJR selection. The figure shows the (a) p<sub>T</sub><sup>ℓ<sub>1</sub></sup> and (b) H<sup>PP</sup><sub>3,1</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-Low, and the (c) p<sup>CM</sup><sub>T ISR</sub> and (d) R<sub>ISR</sub> distributions in SR3ℓ-ISR. The last bin includes overflow. The "FNP leptons" category contains backgrounds from tt̄, tW, WW and Z+jets processes. The "Others" category contains backgrounds from Higgs and rare top processes. Distributions for wino/bino (+) χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> → $W\!Z$ signals are overlaid, with mass values given as (m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>),m(χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>)) GeV. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the observed data to the predicted yields. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties.
{Results of the discovery-fit for the SRs of the RJR selection, calculated using pseudo-experiments.} The first and second column list the 95 CL upper limits on the visible cross section (σ<sub>vis</sub><sup>95</sup>) and on the number of signal events (S<sub>obs</sub><sup>95</sup>). The third column (S<sub>exp</sub><sup>95</sup>) shows the 95 CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number (and ± 1σ excursions on the expectation) of background events. The last two columns indicate the CLb value, i.e. the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis, and the discovery p-value (p(s = 0)). If the observed yield is below the expected yield, the p-value is capped at 0.5. vspace{0.5em}
{Results of the discovery-fit for the SRs of the RJR selection, calculated using pseudo-experiments.} The first and second column list the 95 CL upper limits on the visible cross section (σ<sub>vis</sub><sup>95</sup>) and on the number of signal events (S<sub>obs</sub><sup>95</sup>). The third column (S<sub>exp</sub><sup>95</sup>) shows the 95 CL upper limit on the number of signal events, given the expected number (and ± 1σ excursions on the expectation) of background events. The last two columns indicate the CLb value, i.e. the confidence level observed for the background-only hypothesis, and the discovery p-value (p(s = 0)). If the observed yield is below the expected yield, the p-value is capped at 0.5. vspace{0.5em}
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!Z$-mediated model, for the (1st and 2nd row) wino/bino (+) scenario, (3rd row) the wino/bino (-) scenario, and (4th row) the higgsino scenario, as in Figure 16. Black numbers represent the observed (a) and expected (b) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$-mediated model, for the wino/bino (+) scenario, as in Figure 17. The black numbers represent the observed (a,c,e,g) and expected (b,d,f,h) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$-mediated model, for the wino/bino (+) scenario, as in Figure 17. The black numbers represent the observed (a,c,e,g) and expected (b,d,f,h) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$-mediated model, for the wino/bino (+) scenario, as in Figure 17. The black numbers represent the observed (a,c,e,g) and expected (b,d,f,h) upper cross-section limits.
Exclusion limits obtained for the $W\!h$-mediated model, for the wino/bino (+) scenario, as in Figure 17. The black numbers represent the observed (a,c,e,g) and expected (b,d,f,h) upper cross-section limits.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>nj</sub> regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>nj</sub> regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>nj</sub> regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>nj</sub> regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>nj</sub> regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>nj</sub> regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>nj</sub> regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c) truth-level acceptances and (b,d) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>WZ</sup><sub>nj</sub> regions of the onshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-0j</sub>, (c,d) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>low-m<sub>ll</sub>-nj</sub>, and (e,f) SR<sup>Wh</sup><sub>DF</sub> regions of the $W\!h$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (+) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the wino/bino (-) scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
The χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> (a,c,e,g) truth-level acceptances and (b,d,f,h) reconstruction efficiencies for the higgsino scenario, in the inclusive (a,b) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, (c,d) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, (e,f) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and (g,h) SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions of the offshell $W\!Z$ selection, after MC-to-data efficiency weights are applied.
Summary of onshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (300,200) GeV and m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (600,100) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal points, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks per inclusive regions, and then further for each SR. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5.
Summary of onshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (300,200) GeV and m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (600,100) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal points, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks per inclusive regions, and then further for each SR. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5.
Summary of $W\!h$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (190,60) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks per inclusive regions, and then further for each SR. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5.
Summary of $W\!h$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (190,60) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks per inclusive regions, and then further for each SR. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (250,235) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (250,235) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (125,85) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (125,85) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (250,170) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (250,170) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (+) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (250,235) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (-) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (250,235) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (-) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (125,85) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (-) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (125,85) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (-) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (250,170) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (-) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (250,170) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the wino/bino (-) interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (120,100) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the higgsino interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (120,100) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the higgsino interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (100,40) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the higgsino interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (100,40) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the higgsino interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (185,125) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the higgsino interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
Summary of offshell $W\!Z$ event selections for the m(χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup>,χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>0</sup>) = (185,125) GeV χ̃<sub>1</sub><sup>±</sup>/χ̃<sub>2</sub><sup>0</sup> signal point, for the higgsino interpretation. The yields are normalised to a luminosity of 139 fb<sup>-1</sup>, and MC-to-data efficiency weights from triggering and from the reconstruction and identification of individual physics objects are applied to the final yields in each signal region. After the initial selections, the table is split in row blocks for the inclusive SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-0j, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>lowETmiss</sub>-nj, SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-0j, and SR<sup>offWZ</sup><sub>highETmiss</sub>-nj regions, with the individual SR results in columns. The inclusive OR of regions a through g2 is given in the last column. Selection details per bin are indicated in bracketed blue as relevant, and the final yield for each SR is highlighted in bold green at the end of each block. The generator filters are discussed in detail in Section 4. The "3 isolated lepton selection" includes the common event selection as discussed in Section 5 and the initial SFOS lepton pair selection.
The production of dark matter in association with Higgs bosons is predicted in several extensions of the Standard Model. An exploration of such scenarios is presented, considering final states with missing transverse momentum and $b$-tagged jets consistent with a Higgs boson. The analysis uses proton-proton collision data at a centre-of-mass energy of 13 TeV recorded by the ATLAS experiment at the LHC during Run 2, amounting to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$. The analysis, when compared with previous searches, benefits from a larger dataset, but also has further improvements providing sensitivity to a wider spectrum of signal scenarios. These improvements include both an optimised event selection and advances in the object identification, such as the use of the likelihood-based significance of the missing transverse momentum and variable-radius track-jets. No significant deviation from Standard Model expectations is observed. Limits are set, at 95% confidence level, in two benchmark models with two Higgs doublets extended by either a heavy vector boson $Z'$ or a pseudoscalar singlet $a$ and which both provide a dark matter candidate $\chi$. In the case of the two-Higgs-doublet model with an additional vector boson $Z'$, the observed limits extend up to a $Z'$ mass of 3 TeV for a mass of 100 GeV for the dark matter candidate. The two-Higgs-doublet model with a dark matter particle mass of 10 GeV and an additional pseudoscalar $a$ is excluded for masses of the $a$ up to 520 GeV and 240 GeV for $\tan \beta = 1$ and $\tan \beta = 10$ respectively. Limits on the visible cross-sections are set and range from 0.05 fb to 3.26 fb, depending on the missing transverse momentum and $b$-quark jet multiplicity requirements.
Observed 95% CL exclusion limit for the Zprime-2HDM model.
Expected 95% CL exclusion limit for the Zprime-2HDM model.
Expected +- 1 sigma 95% CL exclusion limit for the Zprime-2HDM model.
Expected +- 2 sigma 95% CL exclusion limit for the Zprime-2HDM model.
Observed 95% CL exclusion limit for the 2HDM+a model ggF production.
Expected 95% CL exclusion limit for the 2HDM+a model ggF production.
Expected +- 1 sigma 95% CL exclusion limit for the 2HDM+a model ggF production.
Expected +- 2 sigma 95% CL exclusion limit for the 2HDM+a model ggF production.
Observed 95% CL exclusion limit for the 2HDM+a model bbA production.
Expected 95% CL exclusion limit for the 2HDM+a model bbA production.
Expected +- 1 sigma 95% CL exclusion limit for the 2HDM+a model bbA production.
Expected +- 2 sigma 95% CL exclusion limit for the 2HDM+a model bbA production.
Observed 95% CL exclusion limit for the Zprime-2HDM model with the benchmark used in arXiv:1707.01302.
Expected 95% CL exclusion limit for the Zprime-2HDM model with the benchmark used in arXiv:1707.01302.
Expected +- 1 sigma 95% CL exclusion limit for the Zprime-2HDM model with the benchmark used in arXiv:1707.01302.
Expected +- 2 sigma 95% CL exclusion limit for the Zprime-2HDM model with the benchmark used in arXiv:1707.01302.
Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on cross-section for Zprime-2HDM model.
Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on cross-section for ggF producton in the 2HDM+a model.
Expected and observed upper limits at 95% CL on cross-section for bbA producton in the 2HDM+a model.
Model-independent upper limits on the visible cross-section $σ_{vis, $h(\bar{b})+DM} ≡ σ_{h+DM} \times B(h \to b\bar{b}) \times \mathcal{A} \times \epsilon$ in the different signal regions.
Theory cross-section for Zprime-2HDM model.
Theory cross-section for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model.
Theory cross-section for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model.
Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 2b region with MET=150-200 GeV.
Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 2b region with MET=200-350 GeV.
Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 2b region with MET=350-500 GeV.
Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 2b region with MET=500-750 GeV.
Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 2b region with MET > 750 GeV.
Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 3b region with MET=150-200 GeV.
Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 3b region with MET=200-350 GeV.
Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 3b region with MET=350-500 GeV.
Distribution of Higgs boson candidate mass in 3b region with MET > 500 GeV.
Yields in 1-lepton control region.
Yields in 2-lepton control region.
MET distribution in 2b region of the 0-lepton channel.
MET distribution in 3b region of the 0-lepton channel.
Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 2b region with MET=150-200 GeV.
Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 2b region with MET=200-350 GeV.
Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 2b region with MET=350-500 GeV.
Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 2b region with MET=500-750 GeV.
Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 2b region with MET > 750 GeV.
Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 3b region with MET=150-200 GeV.
Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 3b region with MET=200-350 GeV.
Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 3b region with MET=350-500 GeV.
Expected signal yields after certain selection cuts in 3b region with MET > 500 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET=150-200 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET=200-350 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET=350-500 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET=500-750 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET > 750 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 3b region with MET=150-200 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 3b region with MET=200-350 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 3b region with MET=350-500 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for bbA production in the 2HDM+a model - 3b region with MET>500 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET=150-200 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET=200-350 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET=350-500 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET=500-750 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 2b region with MET > 750 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 3b region with MET=150-200 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 3b region with MET=200-350 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 3b region with MET=350-500 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the 2HDM+a model - 3b region with MET > 500 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 2b region with MET=150-200 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 2b region with MET=200-350 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 2b region with MET=350-500 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 2b region with MET=500-750 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 2b region with MET > 750 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 3b region with MET=150-200 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 3b region with MET=200-350 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 3b region with MET=350-500 GeV.
Acceptance times efficiency for ggF production in the Zprime-2HDM model - 3b region with MET > 500 GeV.
When you search on a word, e.g. 'collisions', we will automatically search across everything we store about a record. But sometimes you may wish to be more specific. Here we show you how.
Guidance on the query string syntax can also be found in the OpenSearch documentation.
About HEPData Submitting to HEPData HEPData File Formats HEPData Coordinators HEPData Terms of Use HEPData Cookie Policy
Status
Email
Forum
Twitter
GitHub
Copyright ~1975-Present, HEPData | Powered by Invenio, funded by STFC, hosted and originally developed at CERN, supported and further developed at IPPP Durham.