CORRECTED NORMALIZED DISTRIBUTION OF FOUR-JET MASS IN THE INCLUSIVE FOUR-JET SAMPLE. THE PROVIDED UNCERTAINTY CORRESPONDS TO SYSTEMATIC UNCERTAINTY.

CORRECTED NORMALIZED DISTRIBUTION OF FOUR-JET MASS IN THE INCLUSIVE FOUR-JET SAMPLE. THE PROVIDED UNCERTAINTY CORRESPONDS TO SYSTEMATIC UNCERTAINTY.

CORRECTED NORMALIZED DISTRIBUTION OF THE BENGTSSON-ZERWAS ANGLE IN THE INCLUSIVE FOUR-JET SAMPLE. THE PROVIDED UNCERTAINTY CORRESPONDS TO SYSTEMATIC UNCERTAINTY.

CORRECTED NORMALIZED DISTRIBUTION OF THE COSINE OF THE NACHTMANN-REITER ANGLE IN THE INCLUSIVE FOUR-JET SAMPLE. THE PROVIDED UNCERTAINTY CORRESPONDS TO SYSTEMATIC UNCERTAINTY.

CORRECTED NORMALIZED DISTRIBUTION OF SCALED ENERGY OF THE LEADING-JET IN THE INCLUSIVE THREE-JET SAMPLE.

CORRECTED NORMALIZED DISTRIBUTION OF SCALED ENERGY OF THE SECOND-LEADING-JET IN THE INCLUSIVE THREE-JET SAMPLE.

CORRECTED NORMALIZED DISTRIBUTION OF FOUR-JET MASS IN THE INCLUSIVE FOUR-JET SAMPLE.

CORRECTED NORMALIZED DISTRIBUTION OF THE BENGTSSON-ZERWAS ANGLE IN THE INCLUSIVE FOUR-JET SAMPLE.

CORRECTED NORMALIZED DISTRIBUTION OF THE COSINE OF THE NACHTMANN-REITER ANGLE IN THE INCLUSIVE FOUR-JET SAMPLE.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 40 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 50 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 50 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 60 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 60 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 70 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 70 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 80 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 80 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 90 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 90 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 100 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 100 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 110 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 110 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 125 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 125 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 140 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 140 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 160 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 160 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 180 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 180 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 200 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 200 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 225 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 225 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 250 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 250 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 300 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 300 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 400 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 400 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 500 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 500 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 600 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 600 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 1000 GeV and 0 <|y|< 0.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 20 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 25 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 25 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 30 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 30 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 40 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 40 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 50 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 50 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 60 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 60 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 70 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 70 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 80 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 80 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 90 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 90 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 100 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 100 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 110 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 110 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 125 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 125 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 140 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 140 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 160 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 160 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 180 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 180 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 200 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 200 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 225 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 225 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 250 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 250 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 300 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 300 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 400 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 400 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 500 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 500 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 600 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 600 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 1000 GeV and 0.5 <|y|< 1.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 20 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 25 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 25 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 30 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 30 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 40 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 40 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 50 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 50 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 60 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 60 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 70 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 70 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 80 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 80 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 90 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 90 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 100 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 100 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 110 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 110 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 125 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 125 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 140 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 140 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 160 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 160 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 180 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 180 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 200 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 200 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 225 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 225 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 250 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 250 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 300 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 300 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 400 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 400 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 500 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 500 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 600 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 600 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 1000 GeV and 1.0 <|y|< 1.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 20 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 25 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 25 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 30 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 30 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 40 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 40 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 50 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 50 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 60 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 60 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 70 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 70 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 80 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 80 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 90 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 90 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 100 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 100 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 110 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 110 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 125 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 125 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 140 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 140 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 160 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 160 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 180 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 180 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 200 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 200 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 225 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 225 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 250 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 250 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 300 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 300 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 400 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 400 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 500 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 500 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 600 GeV and 1.5 <|y|< 2.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 20 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 25 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 25 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 30 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 30 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 40 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 40 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 50 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 50 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 60 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 60 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 70 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 70 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 80 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 80 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 90 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 90 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 100 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 100 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 110 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 110 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 125 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 125 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 140 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 140 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 160 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 160 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 180 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 180 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 200 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 200 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 225 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 225 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 250 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 250 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 300 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 300 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 400 GeV and 2.0 <|y|< 2.5. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 20 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 25 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 25 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 30 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 30 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 40 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 40 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 50 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 50 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 60 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 60 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 70 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 70 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 80 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 80 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 90 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 90 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 100 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 100 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 110 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 110 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 125 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 125 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 140 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 140 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 160 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 160 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 180 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 180 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 200 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 200 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 225 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 225 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 250 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 250 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 300 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The measured differential jet shape $\rho(r)$ for jets with 300 GeV $< p_{\mathrm{T}} <$ 400 GeV and 2.5 <|y|< 3.0. The CF in the table refers to unfolding correction factor from {\sc pythia6} Tune Z2. The systematic uncertainties from different sources, jet energy scale (JES), unfolding, and single particle response (SPR), are also presented.

The dependence of $\langle N_\mathrm{ch} \rangle$ on the transverse momentum of jets in two different rapidity regions, $|y| < 1$ and $1 < |y| < 2$.

The dependence of $\langle \delta R^2 \rangle$ on the transverse momentum of jets in two different rapidity regions, $|y| < 1$ and $ 1 < |y| < 2 $.

The dependence of $\langle\delta \eta^2\rangle/\langle\delta \phi^2\rangle$ on the transverse momentum for jets with $|y| < 1$.

Mean $p_T$, leading in-jet charged particle.

Mean $p_T$, charged particle jets, $p^{ch.jet}_T > 5$ GeV, $|\eta^{ch.jet}| < 1.9$.

Charged jet rate, $p^\text{ch.jet}_T > 5$ GeV, $|\eta^{ch.jet}| < 1.9$.

Charged jet rate, $p^\text{ch.jet}_T > 30$ GeV, $|\eta^{ch.jet}| < 1.9$.

Jet $p_T$ spectrum, $|\eta^{ch.jet}| < 1.9$, $10 < N_\text{ch} \le 30$.

Jet $p_T$ spectrum, $|\eta^{ch.jet}| < 1.9$, $30 < N_\text{ch} \le 50$.

Jet $p_T$ spectrum, $|\eta^{ch.jet}| < 1.9$, $50 < N_\text{ch} \le 80$.

Jet $p_T$ spectrum, $|\eta^{ch.jet}| < 1.9$, $80 < N_\text{ch} \le 110$.

Jet $p_T$ spectrum, $|\eta^{ch.jet}| < 1.9$, $110 < N_\text{ch} \le 140$.

Intrajet ring $p_{T}$ density, $10 < N_\text{ch} \le 30$.

Intrajet ring $p_{T}$ density, $30 < N_\text{ch} \le 50$.

Intrajet ring $p_{T}$ density, $50 < N_\text{ch} \le 80$.

Intrajet ring $p_{T}$ density, $80 < N_\text{ch} \le 110$.

Intrajet ring $p_{T}$ density, $110 < N_\text{ch} \le 140$.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Measured inclusive fiducial $tt\gamma$ production cross section in the dilepton final state for the different dilepton-flavour channels and combined.

Absolute differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $p_{T}(\gamma)$ . The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Absolute differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $|\eta |(\gamma)$. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Absolute differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of min $\Delta R(\gamma, \ell)$. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Absolute differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $\Delta R(\gamma, \ell_{1})$. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Absolute differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $\Delta R(\gamma, \ell_{2})$. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Absolute differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of min $\Delta R(\gamma, b)$. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Absolute differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $|\Delta\eta(\ell\ell)|$. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Absolute differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $\Delta \phi(\ell\ell)$. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Absolute differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $p_{T}(\ell\ell) $. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Absolute differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $p_{T}(\ell_{1})+p_{T}(\ell_{2})$ . The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Absolute differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of min $\Delta R(\ell, j)$. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Absolute differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $p_{T}(j_{1})$ .

Normalized differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $p_{T}(\gamma)$ . The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Normalized differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $|\eta |(\gamma)$. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Normalized differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of min $\Delta R(\gamma, \ell)$. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Normalized differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $\Delta R(\gamma, \ell_{1})$. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Normalized differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $\Delta R(\gamma, \ell_{2})$. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Normalized differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of min $\Delta R(\gamma, b)$. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Normalized differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $|\Delta\eta(\ell\ell)|$. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Normalized differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $\Delta \phi(\ell\ell)$. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Normalized differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $p_{T}(\ell\ell) $. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Normalized differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $p_{T}(\ell_{1})+p_{T}(\ell_{2})$ . The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Normalized differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of min $\Delta R(\ell, j)$. The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Normalized differential $tt\gamma$ production cross section as a function of $p_{T}(j_{1})$ . The values provided in the table are not divided by the bin width.

Correlation matrix of the systematic uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $p_{T}(\gamma)$ .

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $p_{T}(\gamma)$ .

Correlation matrix of the systematic uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $|\eta |(\gamma)$.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $|\eta |(\gamma)$.

Correlation matrix of the systematic uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of min $\Delta R(\gamma, \ell)$.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of min $\Delta R(\gamma, \ell)$.

Correlation matrix of the systematic uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $\Delta R(\gamma, \ell_{1})$.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $\Delta R(\gamma, \ell_{1})$.

Correlation matrix of the systematic uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $\Delta R(\gamma, \ell_{2})$.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $\Delta R(\gamma, \ell_{2})$.

Correlation matrix of the systematic uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of min $\Delta R(\gamma, b)$.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of min $\Delta R(\gamma, b)$.

Correlation matrix of the systematic uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $|\Delta\eta(\ell\ell)|$.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $|\Delta\eta(\ell\ell)|$.

Correlation matrix of the systematic uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $\Delta \phi(\ell\ell)$.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $\Delta \phi(\ell\ell)$.

Correlation matrix of the systematic uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $p_{T}(\ell\ell) $.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $p_{T}(\ell\ell) $.

Correlation matrix of the systematic uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $p_{T}(\ell_{1})+p_{T}(\ell_{2})$ .

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $p_{T}(\ell_{1})+p_{T}(\ell_{2})$ .

Correlation matrix of the systematic uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of min $\Delta R(\ell, j)$.

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of min $\Delta R(\ell, j)$.

Correlation matrix of the systematic uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $p_{T}(j_{1})$ .

Correlation matrix of the statistical uncertainty in the absolute differential cross section as a function of $p_{T}(j_{1})$ .

Negative log-likelihood difference from the best-fit value for the one-dimensional scans of the Wilson coefficient $c_{tZ}$, using the photon pT distribution from the dilepton analysis. The value of $c^{I}_{tZ}$ is fixed to zero in the fit.

Negative log-likelihood difference from the best-fit value for the one-dimensional scans of the Wilson coefficient $c_{tZ}$, using the combination of photon pT distributions from the dilepton and lepton+jets analyses. The value of $c^{I}_{tZ}$ is fixed to zero in the fit.

Negative log-likelihood difference from the best-fit value for the one-dimensional scans of the Wilson coefficient $c^{I}_{tZ}$, using the photon pT distribution from the dilepton analysis. The value of $c_{tZ}$ is fixed to zero in the fit.

Negative log-likelihood difference from the best-fit value for the one-dimensional scans of the Wilson coefficient $c^{I}_{tZ}$, using the combination of photon pT distributions from the dilepton and lepton+jets analyses. The value of $c_{tZ}$ is fixed to zero in the fit.

Negative log-likelihood difference from the best-fit value for the one-dimensional scans of the Wilson coefficient $c_{tZ}$, using the photon pT distribution from the dilepton analysis. The value of $c^{I}_{tZ}$ is profiled in the fit.

Negative log-likelihood difference from the best-fit value for the one-dimensional scans of the Wilson coefficient $c_{tZ}$, using the combination of photon pT distributions from the dilepton and lepton+jets analyses. The value of $c^{I}_{tZ}$ is profiled in the fit.

Negative log-likelihood difference from the best-fit value for the one-dimensional scans of the Wilson coefficient $c^{I}_{tZ}$, using the photon pT distribution from the dilepton analysis. The value of $c_{tZ}$ is profiled in the fit.

Negative log-likelihood difference from the best-fit value for the one-dimensional scans of the Wilson coefficient $c^{I}_{tZ}$, using the combination of photon pT distributions from the dilepton and lepton+jets analyses. The value of $c_{tZ}$ is profiled in the fit.

Negative log-likelihood difference from the best-fit value as a function of Wilson coefficients $c_{tZ}$ and $c^{I}_{tZ}$ from the interpretation of the dilepton measurement.

Negative log-likelihood difference from the best-fit value as a function of Wilson coefficients $c_{tZ}$ and $c^{I}_{tZ}$ from the interpretation of the dilepton and lepton+jets measurements combined.

One-dimensional 68 and 95% CL intervals obtained for the Wilson coefficients $c_{tZ}$ and $c^{I}_{tZ}$, using the photon $p_{T}$ distribution from the dilepton analysis, or the combination of photon pT distributions from the dilepton and lepton+jets analyses.

Differential cross sections as function of transverse momentum imbalance between Z boson and dijet for Z+ ≥ 2 jets events.

Differential cross sections as function of transverse momentum imbalance between leading and subleading jet for Z+ ≥ 2 jets events.

Area normalized distribution as function of Delta Phi between Z boson and the leading jet for Z+ ≥ 1 jet events.

Area normalized distribution as function of transverse momentum imbalance between Z boson and the leading jet for Z+ ≥ 1 jet events.

Area normalized distribution as function of Delta Phi between Z boson and dijet for Z+ ≥ 2 jets events.

Area normalized distribution as function of transverse momentum imbalance between Z boson and dijet for Z+ ≥ 2 jets events.

Area normalized distribution as function of transverse momentum imbalance between leading and subleading jet for Z+ ≥ 2 jets events

Jet multiplicity measured for a leading-pT jet ($p_{T1}$) with 400 < $p_{T1}$ < 800 GeV and for an azimuthal separation between the two leading jets of $0 < \Delta\Phi_{1,2} < 150^{\circ}$. The full breakdown of the uncertainties is displayed, with PU corresponding to Pileup, PREF to Trigger Prefering, PTHAT to the hard-scale (renormalization and factorization scales), MISS and FAKE to the inefficienties and background, LUMI to integrated luminosity. With JES, JER and stat. unc. following the notation in the paper.

Jet multiplicity measured for a leading-pT jet ($p_{T1}$) with 400 < $p_{T1}$ < 800 GeV and for an azimuthal separation between the two leading jets of $150 < \Delta\Phi_{1,2} < 170^{\circ}$. The full breakdown of the uncertainties is displayed, with PU corresponding to Pileup, PREF to Trigger Prefering, PTHAT to the hard-scale (renormalization and factorization scales), MISS and FAKE to the inefficienties and background, LUMI to integrated luminosity. With JES, JER and stat. unc. following the notation in the paper.

Jet multiplicity measured for a leading-pT jet ($p_{T1}$) with 400 < $p_{T1}$ < 800 GeV and for an azimuthal separation between the two leading jets of $170 < \Delta\Phi_{1,2} < 180^{\circ}$. The full breakdown of the uncertainties is displayed, with PU corresponding to Pileup, PREF to Trigger Prefering, PTHAT to the hard-scale (renormalization and factorization scales), MISS and FAKE to the inefficienties and background, LUMI to integrated luminosity. With JES, JER and stat. unc. following the notation in the paper.

Jet multiplicity measured for a leading-pT jet ($p_{T1}$) with $p_{T1}$ > 800 and for an azimuthal separation between the two leading jets of $0 < \Delta\Phi_{1,2} < 150^{\circ}$. The full breakdown of the uncertainties is displayed, with PU corresponding to Pileup, PREF to Trigger Prefering, PTHAT to the hard-scale (renormalization and factorization scales), MISS and FAKE to the inefficienties and background, LUMI to integrated luminosity. With JES, JER and stat. unc. following the notation in the paper.

Jet multiplicity measured for a leading-pT jet ($p_{T1}$) with $p_{T1}$ > 800 and for an azimuthal separation between the two leading jets of $150 < \Delta\Phi_{1,2} < 170^{\circ}$. The full breakdown of the uncertainties is displayed, with PU corresponding to Pileup, PREF to Trigger Prefering, PTHAT to the hard-scale (renormalization and factorization scales), MISS and FAKE to the inefficienties and background, LUMI to integrated luminosity. With JES, JER and stat. unc. following the notation in the paper.

Jet multiplicity measured for a leading-pT jet ($p_{T1}$) with $p_{T1}$ > 800 and for an azimuthal separation between the two leading jets of $170 < \Delta\Phi_{1,2} < 180^{\circ}$. The full breakdown of the uncertainties is displayed, with PU corresponding to Pileup, PREF to Trigger Prefering, PTHAT to the hard-scale (renormalization and factorization scales), MISS and FAKE to the inefficienties and background, LUMI to integrated luminosity. With JES, JER and stat. unc. following the notation in the paper.

Measured transverse momentum of the leading $p_{T}$ jet ($p_{T1}$). The full breakdown of the uncertainties is displayed, with PU corresponding to Pileup, PREF to Trigger Prefering, PTHAT to the hard-scale (renormalization and factorization scales), MISS and FAKE to the inefficienties and background, LUMI to integrated luminosity. With JES, JER and stat. unc. following the notation in the paper.

Measured transverse momentum of the subleading $p_{T}$ jet ($p_{T2}$). The full breakdown of the uncertainties is displayed, with PU corresponding to Pileup, PREF to Trigger Prefering, PTHAT to the hard-scale (renormalization and factorization scales), MISS and FAKE to the inefficienties and background, LUMI to integrated luminosity. With JES, JER and stat. unc. following the notation in the paper.

Measured transverse momentum of the third leading $p_{T}$ jet ($p_{T3}$). The full breakdown of the uncertainties is displayed, with PU corresponding to Pileup, PREF to Trigger Prefering, PTHAT to the hard-scale (renormalization and factorization scales), MISS and FAKE to the inefficienties and background, LUMI to integrated luminosity. With JES, JER and stat. unc. following the notation in the paper.

Measured transverse momentum of the fourth leading $p_{T}$ jet ($p_{T4}$). The full breakdown of the uncertainties is displayed, with PU corresponding to Pileup, PREF to Trigger Prefering, PTHAT to the hard-scale (renormalization and factorization scales), MISS and FAKE to the inefficienties and background, LUMI to integrated luminosity. With JES, JER and stat. unc. following the notation in the paper.

Jet multiplicity distribution in TUnfold binning ($N_{jets},\Delta\phi_{1,2},p_{T1}$) as indicated in the XML file provided as additional resource. The uncertainties follow the notation of Table 1.

Correlation matrix at particle level for the measured jet multiplicity in TUnfold binning ($N_{jets},\Delta\phi_{1,2},p_{T1}$) as indicated in the XML file provided as additional resource.

Jet $p_{T}$ distributions in TUnfold binning ($p_{T1},p_{T2},p_{T3},p_{T4}$) as indicated in the XML file provided as additional resource. The uncertainties follow the notation of Table 1.

Correlation matrix at particle level for the measured jet $p_{T}$ distributions in TUnfold binning ($p_{T1},p_{T2},p_{T3},p_{T4}$) as indicated in the XML file provided as additional resource.

The JEC, JER, and total systematic uncertainties in unfolded cross sections as functions of transverse momentum, for 1.5<|y|<2. The total systematic uncertainty includes also the luminosity, jet identification and trigger efficiency uncertainties.

The unfolded measured particle-level inclusive jet cross section as functions of jet pT (markers), for |y|<0.5, compared to the NLO perturbative QCD prediction (histogram), using the CT14NLO PDF set, with muR = muF = HT, and corrected for the NP effects. The experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are shown.

The unfolded measured particle-level inclusive jet cross section as functions of jet pT (markers), for 0.5<|y|<1, compared to the NLO perturbative QCD prediction (histogram), using the CT14NLO PDF set, with muR = muF = HT, and corrected for the NP effects. The experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are shown.

The unfolded measured particle-level inclusive jet cross section as functions of jet pT (markers), for 1<|y|<1.5, compared to the NLO perturbative QCD prediction (histogram), using the CT14NLO PDF set, with muR = muF = HT, and corrected for the NP effects. The experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are shown.

The unfolded measured particle-level inclusive jet cross section as functions of jet pT (markers), for 1.5<|y|<2, compared to the NLO perturbative QCD prediction (histogram), using the CT14NLO PDF set, with muR = muF = HT, and corrected for the NP effects. The experimental and theoretical systematic uncertainties are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NLO PDF set, with mu = pT, for |y|<0.5. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NLO PDF set, with mu = pT, for 0.5<|y|<1. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NLO PDF set, with mu = pT, for 1<|y|<1.5. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NLO PDF set, with mu = pT, for 1.5<|y|<2. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for |y|<0.5. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 0.5<|y|<1. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 1<|y|<1.5. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 1.5<|y|<2. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NNLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NNLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for |y|<0.5. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NNLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NNLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 0.5<|y|<1. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NNLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NNLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 1<|y|<1.5. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NNLO theoretical predictions, using the CT14NNLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 1.5<|y|<2. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NNLO theoretical predictions, using the NNPDF31NNLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for |y|<0.5. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NNLO theoretical predictions, using the NNPDF31NNLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 0.5<|y|<1. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NNLO theoretical predictions, using the NNPDF31NNLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 1<|y|<1.5. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

Ratios (points) of the unfolded measured cross sections to the NNLO theoretical predictions, using the NNPDF31NNLO PDF set, with mu = HT, for 1.5<|y|<2. The vertical error bars show the statistical experimental uncertainty. The systematic experimental uncertainty, the total theoretical uncertainty, and the individual sources of theoretical uncertainty are shown.

The effect of aS(MZ) variation, for |y|<0.5. The NNLO theoretical cross section predictions using the NNPDF31NNLO PDF with m = HT, calculated for different choices of aS (0.108, 0.110, 0.112, 0.114, 0.116, 0.117, 0.118, 0.119, 0.120, 0.122, and 0.124), are divided by the benchmark NNLO prediction for aS = 0.118 and the same choice of PDF set, muR, and muF. Also shown is the experimental unfolded measurement divided by the same benchmark prediction. The width of the unity line corresponds to the statistical uncertainty from the MC integration for the determination of the NNLO prediction. The error bars on the unfolded data correspond to the total experimental statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature.

The effect of aS(MZ) variation, for 0.5<|y|<1. The NNLO theoretical cross section predictions using the NNPDF31NNLO PDF with m = HT, calculated for different choices of aS (0.108, 0.110, 0.112, 0.114, 0.116, 0.117, 0.118, 0.119, 0.120, 0.122, and 0.124), are divided by the benchmark NNLO prediction for aS = 0.118 and the same choice of PDF set, muR, and muF. Also shown is the experimental unfolded measurement divided by the same benchmark prediction. The width of the unity line corresponds to the statistical uncertainty from the MC integration for the determination of the NNLO prediction. The error bars on the unfolded data correspond to the total experimental statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature.

The effect of aS(MZ) variation, for 1<|y|<1.5. The NNLO theoretical cross section predictions using the NNPDF31NNLO PDF with m = HT, calculated for different choices of aS (0.108, 0.110, 0.112, 0.114, 0.116, 0.117, 0.118, 0.119, 0.120, 0.122, and 0.124), are divided by the benchmark NNLO prediction for aS = 0.118 and the same choice of PDF set, muR, and muF. Also shown is the experimental unfolded measurement divided by the same benchmark prediction. The width of the unity line corresponds to the statistical uncertainty from the MC integration for the determination of the NNLO prediction. The error bars on the unfolded data correspond to the total experimental statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature.

The effect of aS(MZ) variation, for 1.5<|y|<2. The NNLO theoretical cross section predictions using the NNPDF31NNLO PDF with m = HT, calculated for different choices of aS (0.108, 0.110, 0.112, 0.114, 0.116, 0.117, 0.118, 0.119, 0.120, 0.122, and 0.124), are divided by the benchmark NNLO prediction for aS = 0.118 and the same choice of PDF set, muR, and muF. Also shown is the experimental unfolded measurement divided by the same benchmark prediction. The width of the unity line corresponds to the statistical uncertainty from the MC integration for the determination of the NNLO prediction. The error bars on the unfolded data correspond to the total experimental statistical and systematic uncertainty added in quadrature.

Unfolded correlation matrix for |y|<0.5.

Unfolded correlation matrix for 0.5<|y|<1.

Unfolded correlation matrix for 1<|y|<1.5.

Unfolded correlation matrix for 1.5<|y|<2.

$\Delta\phi$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 0-10% centrality

$\Delta\phi$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 30-40% centrality

1D $\Delta\eta$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 70-80% centrality

$\Delta\eta$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 0-40 $N_{trk}$

$\Delta\eta$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 120-150 $N_{trk}$

$\Delta\eta$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 270-300 $N_{trk}$

$\Delta\phi$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 0-40 $N_{trk}$

$\Delta\phi$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 120-150 $N_{trk}$

$\Delta\phi$ projection of balance function in low $p_{T}$ in 270-300 $N_{trk}$

The width of balance function in $<|\Delta\eta|>$ in low $p_{T}$ for PbPb collisions

Balance function width in low $p_{T}$ PbPb relative $<|\Delta\eta|>/<|\Delta\eta|>_{N_{ch}<65}$

The width of balance function in $<|\Delta\eta|>$ in low $p_{T}$ for pPb collisions

Balance function width in low $p_{T}$ in pPb relative $<|\Delta\eta|>/<|\Delta\eta|>_{N_{ch}<24}$

The width of the balance function in $<|\Delta\phi|>$ in low $p_{T}$ for PbPb collisions

Balance function width in low $p_{T}$ in PbPb for relative $<|\Delta\phi|>/<|\Delta\phi|>_{N_{ch}<65}$

The width of the balance function in $<|\Delta\phi|>$ in low $p_{T}$ for pPb collisions

Balance function width in low $p_{T}$ in pPb for relative $|\Delta\phi|/<|\Delta\phi|>_{N_{ch}<24}$

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 0-10% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 30-40% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 70-80% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 0-10% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 30-40% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 70-80% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in pPb for 0-40 $N_{trk}$

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in pPb for 120-150 $N_{trk}$

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in pPb for 270-300 $N_{trk}$

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in pPb for $N_{trk}$ 0-40

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in pPb for $N_{trk}$ 120-150

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in intermediate $p_{T}$ in pPb for $N_{trk}$ 270-300

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 0-10% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 30-40% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 70-80% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 0-10% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 30-40% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for 70-80% centrality

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in high $p_{T}$ in pPb for $N_{trk}$ 0-40

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in high $p_{T}$ in pPb for $N_{trk}$ 120-150

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\eta$ in high $p_{T}$ in pPb for $N_{trk}$ 270-300

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for $N_{trk}$ 0-40

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for $N_{trk}$ 120-150

Balance function projection as a function of $\Delta\phi$ in high $p_{T}$ in PbPb for $N_{trk}$ 270-300

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \eta$ with $N_{ch}$ for low $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \eta$ with $N_{ch}$ for intermediate $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \eta$ with $N_{ch}$ for high $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \phi$ with $p_{T}$ for low $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \phi$ with $N_{ch}$ for intermediate $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \phi$ with $N_{ch}$ for high $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \eta$ with $N_{ch}$ for low $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \eta$ with $N_{ch}$ for intermediate $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \phi$ with $N_{ch}$ for high $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \phi$ with $N_{ch}$ for low $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \phi$ with $N_{ch}$ for intermediate $p_{T}$

Average width of the balance function in $\Delta \phi$ with $N_{ch}$ for high $p_{T}$