HEPData Search

Showing 10 of 99 results

rivet Analysis
Searches for supersymmetry with the ATLAS detector using final states with two leptons and missing transverse momentum in sqrt{s} = 7 TeV proton-proton collisions

The ATLAS collaboration Aad, Georges ; Abbott, Brad ; Abdallah, Jalal ; et al.

Phys.Lett.B 709 (2012) 137-157, 2012.

Inspire Record 943401 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.58447

Results of three searches are presented for the production of supersymmetric particles decaying into final states with missing transverse momentum and exactly two isolated leptons, e or mu. The analysis uses a data sample collected during the first half of 2011 that corresponds to a total integrated luminosity of 1 fb^-1 of sqrt{s} = 7 TeV proton-proton collisions recorded with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. Opposite-sign and same-sign dilepton events are separately studied, with no deviations from the Standard Model expectation observed. Additionally, in opposite- sign events, a search is made for an excess of same-flavour over different-flavour lepton pairs. Effective production cross sections in excess of 9.9 fb for opposite-sign events containing supersymmetric particles with missing transverse momentum greater than 250 GeV are excluded at 95% CL. For same-sign events containing supersymmetric particles with missing transverse momentum greater than 100 GeV, effective production cross sections in excess of 14.8 fb are excluded at 95% CL. The latter limit is interpreted in a simplified weak gaugino production model excluding chargino masses up to 200 GeV.

18 data tables

Table 1

The dilepton invariant mass distribution for same-sign dileptons.

Table 2

The missing-mass ET distribution for same-sign dilepton events before any jet requirement.

Table 3

The missing-mass ET distribution for same-sign dilepton events after requiring two high-pt jets.

More…

Searches for physics beyond the standard model with the $M_\mathrm{T2}$ variable in hadronic final states with and without disappearing tracks in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV

The CMS collaboration Sirunyan, Albert M ; Tumasyan, Armen ; Adam, Wolfgang ; et al.

Eur.Phys.J.C 80 (2020) 3, 2020.

Inspire Record 1753215 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.90834

Two related searches for phenomena beyond the standard model (BSM) are performed using events with hadronic jets and significant transverse momentum imbalance. The results are based on a sample of proton-proton collisions at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV, collected by the CMS experiment at the LHC in 2016-2018 and corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 137 fb$^{-1}$. The first search is inclusive, based on signal regions defined by the hadronic energy in the event, the jet multiplicity, the number of jets identified as originating from bottom quarks, and the value of the kinematic variable $M_\mathrm{T2}$ for events with at least two jets. For events with exactly one jet, the transverse momentum of the jet is used instead. The second search looks in addition for disappearing tracks produced by BSM long-lived charged particles that decay within the volume of the tracking detector. No excess event yield is observed above the predicted standard model background. This is used to constrain a range of BSM models that predict the following: the pair production of gluinos and squarks in the context of supersymmetry models conserving $R$-parity, with or without intermediate long-lived charginos produced in the decay chain; the resonant production of a colored scalar state decaying to a massive Dirac fermion and a quark; or the pair production of scalar and vector leptoquarks each decaying to a neutrino and a top, bottom, or light-flavor quark. In most of the cases, the results obtained are the most stringent constraints to date.

0 data tables

HistFactory
Searches for new phenomena in events with two leptons, jets, and missing transverse momentum in $139~\text{fb}^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s}=13~$TeV $pp$ collisions with the ATLAS detector

The ATLAS collaboration Aad, Georges ; Abbott, Braden Keim ; Abbott, D.C. ; et al.

Eur.Phys.J.C 83 (2023) 515, 2023.

Inspire Record 2072870 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.116034

Searches for new phenomena inspired by supersymmetry in final states containing an $e^+e^-$ or $\mu^+\mu^-$ pair, jets, and missing transverse momentum are presented. These searches make use of proton-proton collision data with an integrated luminosity of 139 $\text{fb}^{-1}$, collected during 2015-2018 at a centre-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}=13 $TeV by the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider. Two searches target the pair production of charginos and neutralinos. One uses the recursive-jigsaw reconstruction technique to follow up on excesses observed in 36.1 $\text{fb}^{-1}$ of data, and the other uses conventional event variables. The third search targets pair production of coloured supersymmetric particles (squarks or gluinos) decaying through the next-to-lightest neutralino $(\tilde\chi_2^0)$ via a slepton $(\tilde\ell)$ or $Z$ boson into $\ell^+\ell^-\tilde\chi_1^0$, resulting in a kinematic endpoint or peak in the dilepton invariant mass spectrum. The data are found to be consistent with the Standard Model expectations. Results are interpreted using simplified models and exclude masses up to 900 GeV for electroweakinos, 1550 GeV for squarks, and 2250 GeV for gluinos.

0 data tables

Version 5

HistFactory
Searches for electroweak production of supersymmetric particles with compressed mass spectra in $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV $pp$ collisions with the ATLAS detector

The ATLAS collaboration Aad, Georges ; Abbott, Brad ; Abbott, Dale Charles ; et al.

Phys.Rev.D 101 (2020) 052005, 2020.

Inspire Record 1767649 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.91374

This paper presents results of searches for electroweak production of supersymmetric particles in models with compressed mass spectra. The searches use 139 fb$^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV proton-proton collision data collected by the ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider. Events with missing transverse momentum and two same-flavor, oppositely charged, low transverse momentum leptons are selected, and are further categorized by the presence of hadronic activity from initial-state radiation or a topology compatible with vector-boson fusion processes. The data are found to be consistent with predictions from the Standard Model. The results are interpreted using simplified models of $R$-parity-conserving supersymmetry in which the lightest supersymmetric partner is a neutralino with a mass similar to the lightest chargino, the second-to-lightest neutralino or the slepton. Lower limits on the masses of charginos in different simplified models range from 193 GeV to 240 GeV for moderate mass splittings, and extend down to mass splittings of 1.5 GeV to 2.4 GeV at the LEP chargino bounds (92.4 GeV). Similar lower limits on degenerate light-flavor sleptons extend up to masses of 251 GeV and down to mass splittings of 550 MeV. Constraints on vector-boson fusion production of electroweak SUSY states are also presented.

408 data tables

Figure 14a Expected

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct higgsino production.

Figure 14a Expected

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct higgsino production.

Figure 14a Expected

Expected 95% CL exclusion sensitivity for simplified models of direct higgsino production.

More…

Searches for additional Higgs bosons and for vector leptoquarks in $\tau\tau$ final states in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV

The CMS collaboration Tumasyan, Armen ; Adam, Wolfgang ; Andrejkovic, Janik Walter ; et al.

JHEP 07 (2023) 073, 2023.

Inspire Record 2132368 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.128147

Three searches are presented for signatures of physics beyond the standard model (SM) in $\tau\tau$ final states in proton-proton collisions at the LHC, using a data sample collected with the CMS detector at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 138 fb$^{-1}$. Upper limits at 95% confidence level (CL) are set on the products of the branching fraction for the decay into $\tau$ leptons and the cross sections for the production of a new boson $\phi$, in addition to the H(125) boson, via gluon fusion (gg$\phi$) or in association with b quarks, ranging from $\mathcal{O}$(10 pb) for a mass of 60 GeV to 0.3 fb for a mass of 3.5 TeV each. The data reveal two excesses for gg$\phi$ production with local $p$-values equivalent to about three standard deviations at $m_\phi$ = 0.1 and 1.2 TeV. In a search for $t$-channel exchange of a vector leptoquark U$_1$, 95% CL upper limits are set on the dimensionless U$_1$ leptoquark coupling to quarks and $\tau$ leptons ranging from 1 for a mass of 1 TeV to 6 for a mass of 5 TeV, depending on the scenario. In the interpretations of the $M_\mathrm{h}^{125}$ and $M_\mathrm{h, EFT}^{125}$ minimal supersymmetric SM benchmark scenarios, additional Higgs bosons with masses below 350 GeV are excluded at 95% CL.

232 data tables

Table Figure 10a

Expected and observed $95\%\text{ CL}$ upper limits on the product of the cross sections and branching fraction for the decay into $\tau$ leptons for $gg\phi$ production in a mass range of $60\leq m_\phi\leq 3500\text{ GeV}$, in addition to $\text{H}(125)$. The central $68$ and $95\%$ intervals are given in addition to the expected median value. In this case, $bb\phi$ production rate has been profiled. The peak in the expected $gg\phi$ limit is tribute to a loss of sensitivity around $90\text{ GeV}$ due to the background from $Z/\gamma^\ast\rightarrow\tau\tau$ events. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 10a of the publication.

Table Figure 10b

Expected and observed $95\%\text{ CL}$ upper limits on the product of the cross sections and branching fraction for the decay into $\tau$ leptons for $bb\phi$ production in a mass range of $60\leq m_\phi\leq 3500\text{ GeV}$, in addition to $\text{H}(125)$. The central $68$ and $95\%$ intervals are given in addition to the expected median value. In this case, $gg\phi$ production rate has been profiled. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 10b of the publication.

Table Aux. Figure 37

Expected and observed $95\%\text{ CL}$ upper limits on the product of the cross sections and branching fraction for the decay into $\tau$ leptons for $gg\phi$ production in a mass range of $60\leq m_\phi\leq 3500\text{ GeV}$, in addition to $\text{H}(125)$. The central $68$ and $95\%$ intervals are given in addition to the expected median value. In this case, $bb\phi$ production rate has been fixed to zero. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 37 of the auxilliary material of the publication.

Table $t\bar{t}$ Control Region 2016 High-Mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the $t\bar{t}$ control region $m_{T}^{tot}$ for high-mass analysis. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to the $t\bar{t}$ control region of the publication, restricted to 2016 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table $t\bar{t}$ Control Region 2017 High-Mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the $t\bar{t}$ control region $m_{T}^{tot}$ for high-mass analysis. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to the $t\bar{t}$ control region of the publication, restricted to 2017 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table $t\bar{t}$ Control Region 2018 High-Mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the $t\bar{t}$ control region $m_{T}^{tot}$ for high-mass analysis. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to the $t\bar{t}$ control region of the publication, restricted to 2018 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 25 2016 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 25 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to 2016 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 25 2017 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 25 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to and 2017 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 25 2018 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 25 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to and 2018 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8a 2016 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8a of the publication, but restricted to 2016 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8a 2017 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8a of the publication, but restricted to and 2017 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8a 2018 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8a of the publication, but restricted to and 2018 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 26 2016 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 26 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to 2016 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 26 2017 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 26 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to and 2017 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 26 2018 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 26 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to and 2018 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8b 2016 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8b of the publication, but restricted to 2016 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8b 2017 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8b of the publication, but restricted to and 2017 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8b 2018 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8b of the publication, but restricted to and 2018 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 27 2016 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 27 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to 2016 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 27 2017 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 27 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to and 2017 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 27 2018 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 27 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to and 2018 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 28 2016 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 28 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to 2016 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 28 2017 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 28 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to and 2017 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 28 2018 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 28 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to and 2018 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8c $e\tau_{h}$ 2016 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8c of the publication, but restricted to $e\tau_{h}$ final state and 2016 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8c $e\tau_{h}$ 2017 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8c of the publication, but restricted to $e\tau_{h}$ final state and 2017 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8c $e\tau_{h}$ 2018 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8c of the publication, but restricted to $e\tau_{h}$ final state and 2018 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 29 $e\tau_{h}$ 2016 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 29 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to $e\tau_{h}$ final state and 2016 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 29 $e\tau_{h}$ 2017 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 29 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to $e\tau_{h}$ final state and 2017 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 29 $e\tau_{h}$ 2018 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 29 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to $e\tau_{h}$ final state and 2018 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8d $e\tau_{h}$ 2016 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8d of the publication, but restricted to $e\tau_{h}$ final state and 2016 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8d $e\tau_{h}$ 2017 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8d of the publication, but restricted to $e\tau_{h}$ final state and 2017 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8d $e\tau_{h}$ 2018 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8d of the publication, but restricted to $e\tau_{h}$ final state and 2018 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 30 $e\tau_{h}$ 2016 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 30 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to $e\tau_{h}$ final state and 2016 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 30 $e\tau_{h}$ 2017 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 30 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to $e\tau_{h}$ final state and 2017 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 30 $e\tau_{h}$ 2018 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 30 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to $e\tau_{h}$ final state and 2018 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8c $\mu\tau_{h}$ 2016 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8c of the publication, but restricted to $\mu\tau_{h}$ final state and 2016 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8c $\mu\tau_{h}$ 2017 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8c of the publication, but restricted to $\mu\tau_{h}$ final state and 2017 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8c $\mu\tau_{h}$ 2018 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8c of the publication, but restricted to $\mu\tau_{h}$ final state and 2018 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 29 $\mu\tau_{h}$ 2016 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 29 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to $\mu\tau_{h}$ final state and 2016 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 29 $\mu\tau_{h}$ 2017 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 29 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to $\mu\tau_{h}$ final state and 2017 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 29 $\mu\tau_{h}$ 2018 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 29 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to $\mu\tau_{h}$ final state and 2018 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8d $\mu\tau_{h}$ 2016 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8d of the publication, but restricted to $\mu\tau_{h}$ final state and 2016 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8d $\mu\tau_{h}$ 2017 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8d of the publication, but restricted to $\mu\tau_{h}$ final state and 2017 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8d $\mu\tau_{h}$ 2018 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8d of the publication, but restricted to $\mu\tau_{h}$ final state and 2018 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 30 $\mu\tau_{h}$ 2016 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 30 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to $\mu\tau_{h}$ final state and 2016 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 30 $\mu\tau_{h}$ 2017 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 30 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to $\mu\tau_{h}$ final state and 2017 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Aux. Figure 30 $\mu\tau_{h}$ 2018 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 30 of the auxilliary material of the publication, but restricted to $\mu\tau_{h}$ final state and 2018 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8e 2016 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8e of the publication, but restricted to 2016 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8e 2017 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8e of the publication, but restricted to 2017 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

Table Figure 8e 2018 High-mass

Observed and expected distributions of the variable chosen for statistical inference in the high-mass analysis $m_{T}^{tot}$. Numerical values provided in this table correspond to Figure 8e of the publication, but restricted to 2018 data-taking year. All distributions are considered after a fit to data is performed using a background-only model, which includes the $\text{H}(125)$ boson. Some details on how the distributions should be used: 1) All given uncertainties correspond to systematic variations of $\pm1\sigma$. 2) Upper values ('plus' in the yaml file) correspond to an upward systematic variation of the parameter ($+1\sigma$). 3) Lower values ('minus' in the yaml file) correspond to a downward systematic variation of the parameter ($-1\sigma$). 4) These variations can have both positive and negative values, depending on the modelled effect. 5) Uncertainties with the same name should be treated as correlated, consistently across the upper and lower variations. 6) Systematic uncertainties with 'prop_' in the name treat limited background statistics per histogram bin, and are deployed with 'Barlow-Beeston-lite' approach. Details in https://arxiv.org/abs/1103.0354 section 5 7) Remaining systematic uncertainties alter the normalization, the shape, or both for a distribution. The nuisance parameter for such an uncertainty is mapped separately on the normalization and the shape variation components of the uncertainty. For normalization, $\ln$ mapping is used, for shape a spline. Details in https://cms-analysis.github.io/HiggsAnalysis-CombinedLimit/part2/settinguptheanalysis/#binned-shape-analysis 8) All nuisance parameters for the systematic uncertainties are modelled with a Gaussian pdf. 9) Gluon fusion contributions are all scaled to 1 pb. Please combine them using either the scale factors from 'Table SM Gluon Fusion Fractions', or using your own composition.

More…

Search in diphoton and dielectron final states for displaced production of Higgs or $Z$ bosons with the ATLAS detector in $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV $pp$ collisions

The ATLAS collaboration Aad, Georges ; Abbott, Braden Keim ; Abbott, Dale ; et al.

Phys.Rev.D 108 (2023) 012012, 2023.

Inspire Record 2654099 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.135829

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.

0 data tables

Version 2

HistFactory
Search for trilepton resonances from chargino and neutralino pair production in $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV $pp$ collisions with the ATLAS detector

The ATLAS collaboration Aad, Georges ; Abbott, Braden Keim ; Abbott, Brad ; et al.

Phys.Rev.D 103 (2021) 112003, 2021.

Inspire Record 1831992 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.99806

A search is performed for the electroweak pair production of charginos and associated production of a chargino and neutralino, each of which decays through an $R$-parity-violating coupling into a lepton and a $W$, $Z$, or Higgs boson. The trilepton invariant-mass spectrum is constructed from events with three or more leptons, targeting chargino decays that include an electron or muon and a leptonically decaying $Z$ boson. The analyzed dataset corresponds to an integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ of proton-proton collision data produced by the Large Hadron Collider at a center-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV and collected by the ATLAS experiment between 2015 and 2018. The data are found to be consistent with predictions from the Standard Model. The results are interpreted as limits at 95% confidence level on model-independent cross sections for processes beyond the Standard Model. Limits are also set on the production of charginos and neutralinos for a Minimal Supersymmetric Standard Model with an approximate $B$-$L$ symmetry. Charginos and neutralinos with masses between 100 GeV and 1100 GeV are excluded depending on the assumed decay branching fractions into a lepton (electron, muon, or $\tau$-lepton) plus a boson ($W$, $Z$, or Higgs).

283 data tables

README and Table of Contents

This is the HEPData space for the trilepton resonance wino search, the full resolution figures can be found here https://atlas.web.cern.ch/Atlas/GROUPS/PHYSICS/PAPERS/SUSY-2018-36/. The full statistical likelihoods have been provided for this analysis. They can be downloaded by clicking on the purple 'Resources' buttun above where they can then be found in the 'Common Resources' area. A detailed README for how to use the likelihoods is also included in this download. Exclusion contours: <ul display="inline-block"> <li><a href="?table=Obs.%20data%20vs%20SM%20bkg.%20exp.%20in%20CRs%20and%20VRs">Obs. data vs SM bkg. exp. in CRs and VRs</a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0%20">$\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0 </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0_Up%20">$\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0_Up </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0_Down%20">$\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0_Down </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0%20">$\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0 </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0_Up%20">$\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0_Up </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0_Down%20">$\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0_Down </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0%20">$\ell=e$, Obs_0 </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0_Up%20">$\ell=e$, Obs_0_Up </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0_Down%20">$\ell=e$, Obs_0_Down </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0%20">$\ell=e$, Exp_0 </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0_Up%20">$\ell=e$, Exp_0_Up </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0_Down%20">$\ell=e$, Exp_0_Down </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0%20">$\ell=\mu$, Obs_0 </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0_Up%20">$\ell=\mu$, Obs_0_Up </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0_Down%20">$\ell=\mu$, Obs_0_Down </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0%20">$\ell=\mu$, Exp_0 </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0_Up%20">$\ell=\mu$, Exp_0_Up </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0_Down%20">$\ell=\mu$, Exp_0_Down </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs_0%20">$\ell=\tau$, Obs_0 </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs_0_Up%20">$\ell=\tau$, Obs_0_Up </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs_0_Down%20">$\ell=\tau$, Obs_0_Down </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp_0%20">$\ell=\tau$, Exp_0 </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp_0_Up%20">$\ell=\tau$, Exp_0_Up </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp_0_Down%20">$\ell=\tau$, Exp_0_Down </a> </ul> Triangle Exclusion contours: <ul display="inline-block"> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs%20Lim">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp%20Lim">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs%20Lim">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp%20Lim">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs%20Lim">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp%20Lim">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs%20Lim">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp%20Lim">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs%20Lim">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp%20Lim">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs%20Lim">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp%20Lim">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs%20Lim">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp%20Lim">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs%20Lim">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp%20Lim">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs%20Lim">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20600%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp%20Lim">Triangle, 600 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs%20Lim">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp%20Lim">Triangle, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs%20Lim">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20800%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp%20Lim">Triangle, 800 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs%20Lim">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20900%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp%20Lim">Triangle, 900 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20200%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, 200 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20200%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, 200 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20200%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, 200 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20200%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, 200 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20200%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, 200 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20200%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, 200 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20200%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs%20Lim">Triangle, 200 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Obs Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20200%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp%20Lim">Triangle, 200 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Exp Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20300%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, 300 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20300%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, 300 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20300%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, 300 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20300%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, 300 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20300%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, 300 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20300%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, 300 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20300%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs%20Lim">Triangle, 300 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Obs Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20300%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp%20Lim">Triangle, 300 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Exp Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20400%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, 400 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20400%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, 400 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20400%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, 400 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20400%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, 400 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20400%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, 400 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20400%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, 400 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20400%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs%20Lim">Triangle, 400 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Obs Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20400%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp%20Lim">Triangle, 400 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Exp Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20500%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, 500 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20500%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, 500 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20500%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, 500 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20500%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, 500 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20500%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, 500 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20500%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, 500 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20500%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Obs%20Lim">Triangle, 500 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Obs Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20500%20GeV,%20$\ell=\tau$,%20Exp%20Lim">Triangle, 500 GeV, $\ell=\tau$, Exp Lim</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20ObsLimVal">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, ObsLimVal</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20ExpLimVal">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, ExpLimVal</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20ObsLimVal">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, ObsLimVal</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20ExpLimVal">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, ExpLimVal</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20ObsLimVal">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, ObsLimVal</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20ExpLimVal">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, ExpLimVal</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20ObsLimVal">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, ObsLimVal</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20ExpLimVal">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, ExpLimVal</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20ObsLimVal">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, ObsLimVal</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20ExpLimVal">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, ExpLimVal</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20ObsLimVal">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, ObsLimVal</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=e$,%20ExpLimVal">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=e$, ExpLimVal</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20ObsLimVal">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, ObsLimVal</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SRFR,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20ExpLimVal">Triangle, SRFR, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, ExpLimVal</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20ObsLimVal">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, ObsLimVal</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR4$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20ExpLimVal">Triangle, SR4$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, ExpLimVal</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0_Up">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Obs_0_Down">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Obs_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0_Up">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0_Up</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20Exp_0_Down">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, Exp_0_Down</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20ObsLimVal">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, ObsLimVal</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20SR3$\ell$,%20700%20GeV,%20$\ell=\mu$,%20ExpLimVal">Triangle, SR3$\ell$, 700 GeV, $\ell=\mu$, ExpLimVal</a> </ul> Upper limits: <ul display="inline-block"> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20upperLimit_XS_gr%20">$\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, upperLimit_XS_gr </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$,%20expectedUpperLimit_XS_gr%20">$\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$, expectedUpperLimit_XS_gr </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=e$,%20upperLimit_XS_gr%20">$\ell=e$, upperLimit_XS_gr </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=e$,%20expectedUpperLimit_XS_gr%20">$\ell=e$, expectedUpperLimit_XS_gr </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=\mu$,%20upperLimit_XS_gr%20">$\ell=\mu$, upperLimit_XS_gr </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=\mu$,%20expectedUpperLimit_XS_gr%20">$\ell=\mu$, expectedUpperLimit_XS_gr </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=\tau$,%20upperLimit_XS_gr%20">$\ell=\tau$, upperLimit_XS_gr </a> <li><a href="?table=$\ell=\tau$,%20expectedUpperLimit_XS_gr%20">$\ell=\tau$, expectedUpperLimit_XS_gr </a> </ul> Kinematic distributions: <ul display="inline-block"> <li><a href="?table=Variable%20bin%20$m_{Z\ell}$%20for%20SRFR%20">Variable bin $m_{Z\ell}$ for SRFR </a> <li><a href="?table=Variable%20bin%20$m_{Z\ell}$%20for%20SR4$\ell$%20">Variable bin $m_{Z\ell}$ for SR4$\ell$ </a> <li><a href="?table=Variable%20bin%20$m_{Z\ell}$%20for%20SR3$\ell$%20">Variable bin $m_{Z\ell}$ for SR3$\ell$ </a> <li><a href="?table=N-1%20for%20SR3$\ell$,%20$E^{miss}_{T}$%20">N-1 for SR3$\ell$, $E^{miss}_{T}$ </a> <li><a href="?table=N-1%20for%20SR3$\ell$,%20$m^{min}_{T}$%20">N-1 for SR3$\ell$, $m^{min}_{T}$ </a> <li><a href="?table=N-1%20for%20SR4$\ell$,%20$E^{miss,SF}_{T}$%20">N-1 for SR4$\ell$, $E^{miss,SF}_{T}$ </a> <li><a href="?table=N-1%20for%20SRFR,%20$m^{asym}_{Z\ell}$%20">N-1 for SRFR, $m^{asym}_{Z\ell}$ </a> <li><a href="?table=$m_{Z\ell}$%20for%20SRFR%20">$m_{Z\ell}$ for SRFR </a> <li><a href="?table=$m_{Z\ell}$%20for%20SR4$\ell$%20">$m_{Z\ell}$ for SR4$\ell$ </a> <li><a href="?table=$m_{Z\ell}$%20for%20SR3$\ell$%20">$m_{Z\ell}$ for SR3$\ell$ </a> <li><a href="?table=$L_{T}$%20for%20SR4$\ell$%20">$L_{T}$ for SR4$\ell$ </a> </ul> Cut flows: <ul display="inline-block"> <li><a href="?table=Yields%20Table">Yields Table</a> <li><a href="?table=Model-Independent%20Results%20Table,%20SRFR">Model-Independent Results Table, SRFR</a> <li><a href="?table=Model-Independent%20Results%20Table,%20SR4$\ell$">Model-Independent Results Table, SR4$\ell$</a> <li><a href="?table=Model-Independent%20Results%20Table,%20SR3$\ell$">Model-Independent Results Table, SR3$\ell$</a> <li><a href="?table=Cutflow%20Table">Cutflow Table</a> </ul> Acceptances and Efficiencies: <ul display="inline-block"> <li><a href="?table=Acceptance%20in%20the%20SRFR%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$">Acceptance in the SRFR region with $\ell=$$(e, \mu, \tau)$</a> <li><a href="?table=Acceptance%20in%20the%20SRFR%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$e$">Acceptance in the SRFR region with $\ell=$$e$</a> <li><a href="?table=Acceptance%20in%20the%20SRFR%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$\mu$">Acceptance in the SRFR region with $\ell=$$\mu$</a> <li><a href="?table=Acceptance%20in%20the%20SRFR%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$\tau$">Acceptance in the SRFR region with $\ell=$$\tau$</a> <li><a href="?table=Acceptance%20in%20the%20SR4$\ell$%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$">Acceptance in the SR4$\ell$ region with $\ell=$$(e, \mu, \tau)$</a> <li><a href="?table=Acceptance%20in%20the%20SR4$\ell$%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$e$">Acceptance in the SR4$\ell$ region with $\ell=$$e$</a> <li><a href="?table=Acceptance%20in%20the%20SR4$\ell$%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$\mu$">Acceptance in the SR4$\ell$ region with $\ell=$$\mu$</a> <li><a href="?table=Acceptance%20in%20the%20SR4$\ell$%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$\tau$">Acceptance in the SR4$\ell$ region with $\ell=$$\tau$</a> <li><a href="?table=Acceptance%20in%20the%20SR3$\ell$%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$">Acceptance in the SR3$\ell$ region with $\ell=$$(e, \mu, \tau)$</a> <li><a href="?table=Acceptance%20in%20the%20SR3$\ell$%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$e$">Acceptance in the SR3$\ell$ region with $\ell=$$e$</a> <li><a href="?table=Acceptance%20in%20the%20SR3$\ell$%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$\mu$">Acceptance in the SR3$\ell$ region with $\ell=$$\mu$</a> <li><a href="?table=Acceptance%20in%20the%20SR3$\ell$%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$\tau$">Acceptance in the SR3$\ell$ region with $\ell=$$\tau$</a> <li><a href="?table=Efficiency%20in%20the%20SRFR%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$">Efficiency in the SRFR region with $\ell=$$(e, \mu, \tau)$</a> <li><a href="?table=Efficiency%20in%20the%20SRFR%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$e$">Efficiency in the SRFR region with $\ell=$$e$</a> <li><a href="?table=Efficiency%20in%20the%20SRFR%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$\mu$">Efficiency in the SRFR region with $\ell=$$\mu$</a> <li><a href="?table=Efficiency%20in%20the%20SRFR%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$\tau$">Efficiency in the SRFR region with $\ell=$$\tau$</a> <li><a href="?table=Efficiency%20in%20the%20SR4$\ell$%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$">Efficiency in the SR4$\ell$ region with $\ell=$$(e, \mu, \tau)$</a> <li><a href="?table=Efficiency%20in%20the%20SR4$\ell$%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$e$">Efficiency in the SR4$\ell$ region with $\ell=$$e$</a> <li><a href="?table=Efficiency%20in%20the%20SR4$\ell$%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$\mu$">Efficiency in the SR4$\ell$ region with $\ell=$$\mu$</a> <li><a href="?table=Efficiency%20in%20the%20SR4$\ell$%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$\tau$">Efficiency in the SR4$\ell$ region with $\ell=$$\tau$</a> <li><a href="?table=Efficiency%20in%20the%20SR3$\ell$%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$">Efficiency in the SR3$\ell$ region with $\ell=$$(e, \mu, \tau)$</a> <li><a href="?table=Efficiency%20in%20the%20SR3$\ell$%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$e$">Efficiency in the SR3$\ell$ region with $\ell=$$e$</a> <li><a href="?table=Efficiency%20in%20the%20SR3$\ell$%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$\mu$">Efficiency in the SR3$\ell$ region with $\ell=$$\mu$</a> <li><a href="?table=Efficiency%20in%20the%20SR3$\ell$%20region%20with%20$\ell=$$\tau$">Efficiency in the SR3$\ell$ region with $\ell=$$\tau$</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20Acceptance%20in%20SRFR,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$">Triangle, Acceptance in SRFR, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20Acceptance%20in%20SR4$\ell$,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$">Triangle, Acceptance in SR4$\ell$, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20Acceptance%20in%20SR3$\ell$,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$">Triangle, Acceptance in SR3$\ell$, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20Efficiency%20in%20SRFR,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$">Triangle, Efficiency in SRFR, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20Efficiency%20in%20SR4$\ell$,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$">Triangle, Efficiency in SR4$\ell$, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$</a> <li><a href="?table=Triangle,%20Efficiency%20in%20SR3$\ell$,%20$\ell=(e,%20\mu,%20\tau)$">Triangle, Efficiency in SR3$\ell$, $\ell=(e, \mu, \tau)$</a> <li><a href="?table=Acceptance%20by%20Final%20State%20in%20SRFR">Acceptance by Final State in SRFR</a> <li><a href="?table=Acceptance%20by%20Final%20State%20in%20SR4$\ell$">Acceptance by Final State in SR4$\ell$</a> <li><a href="?table=Acceptance%20by%20Final%20State%20in%20SR3$\ell$">Acceptance by Final State in SR3$\ell$</a> </ul>

Obs. data vs SM bkg. exp. in CRs and VRs

The observed data and the SM background expectation in the CRs (pre-fit) and VRs (post-fit). The ''Other'' category mostly consists of tW Z, ttW, and tZ processes. The hatched bands indicate the combined theoretical, experimental, and MC statistical uncertainties. The bottom panel shows the fractional difference between the observed data and expected yields for the CRs and the significance of the difference for the VRs, computed following the profile likelihood method described in Ref. [arXiv: physics/0702156].

Yields Table

The observed yields and post-fit background expectations in SRFR, SR4$\ell$, and SR3$\ell$, shown inclusively and when the direct lepton from a $\tilde\chi^{\pm}_{1}/\tilde\chi^{0}_{1}$ decay is required to be an electron or muon. The Other category mostly consists of $tWZ$, $t\bar{t}W$, and $tZ$ processes. Uncertainties on the background expectation include combined statistical and systematic uncertainties. The individual uncertainties may be correlated and do not necessarily add in quadrature to equal the total background uncertainty.

More…

Search for top squarks and dark matter particles in opposite-charge dilepton final states at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV

The CMS collaboration Sirunyan, Albert M ; Tumasyan, Armen ; Adam, Wolfgang ; et al.

Phys.Rev.D 97 (2018) 032009, 2018.

Inspire Record 1634253 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.79809

A search for new physics is presented in final states with two oppositely charged leptons (electrons or muons), jets identified as originating from b quarks, and missing transverse momentum ($p_\mathrm{T}^\text{miss}$). The search uses proton-proton collision data at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV amounting to 35.9 fb$^{-1}$ of integrated luminosity collected using the CMS detector in 2016. Hypothetical signal events are efficiently separated from the dominant $\mathrm{t}\overline{\mathrm{t}}$ background with requirements on $p_\mathrm{T}^\text{miss}$ and transverse mass variables. No significant deviation is observed from the expected background. Exclusion limits are set in the context of simplified supersymmetric models with pair-produced top squarks. For top squarks, decaying exclusively to a top quark and a neutralino, exclusion limits are placed at 95% confidence level on the mass of the lightest top squark up to 800 GeV and on the lightest neutralino up to 360 GeV. These results, combined with searches in the single-lepton and all-jet final states, raise the exclusion limits up to 1050 GeV for the lightest top squark and up to 500 GeV for the lightest neutralino. For top squarks undergoing a cascade decay through charginos and sleptons, the mass limits reach up to 1300 GeV for top squarks and up to 800 GeV for the lightest neutralino. The results are also interpreted in a simplified model with a dark matter (DM) particle coupled to the top quark through a scalar or pseudoscalar mediator. For light DM, mediator masses up to 100 (50) GeV are excluded for scalar (pseudoscalar) mediators. The result for the scalar mediator achieves some of the most stringent limits to date in this model.

49 data tables

Figure 2a

Figure 2 (left). Distribution of $M_{T2}(ll)$ in simulation after preselection and requiring $M_{T2}(ll) > 100$ GeV.

Figure 2b

Figure 2 (center). Distribution of $M_{T2}(blbl)$ in simulation after preselection and requiring $M_{T2}(ll) > 100$ GeV.

Figure 2c

Figure 2 (right). Distribution of $p_{T}^{miss}$ in simulation after preselection and requiring $M_{T2}(ll) > 100$ GeV.

More…

Search for top squark production in fully-hadronic final states in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV

The CMS collaboration Sirunyan, Albert M ; Tumasyan, Armen ; Adam, Wolfgang ; et al.

Phys.Rev.D 104 (2021) 052001, 2021.

Inspire Record 1849522 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.103065

A search for production of the supersymmetric partners of the top quark, top squarks, is presented. The search is based on proton-proton collision events containing multiple jets, no leptons, and large transverse momentum imbalance. The data were collected with the CMS detector at the CERN LHC at a center-of-mass energy of 13 TeV, and correspond to an integrated luminosity of 137 fb$^{-1}$. The targeted signal production scenarios are direct and gluino-mediated top squark production, including scenarios in which the top squark and neutralino masses are nearly degenerate. The search utilizes novel algorithms based on deep neural networks that identify hadronically decaying top quarks and W bosons, which are expected in many of the targeted signal models. No statistically significant excess of events is observed relative to the expectation from the standard model, and limits on the top squark production cross section are obtained in the context of simplified supersymmetric models for various production and decay modes. Exclusion limits as high as 1310 GeV are established at the 95% confidence level on the mass of the top squark for direct top squark production models, and as high as 2260 GeV on the mass of the gluino for gluino-mediated top squark production models. These results represent a significant improvement over the results of previous searches for supersymmetry by CMS in the same final state.

0 data tables

Search for top squark pair production in pp collisions at sqrt(s)=13 TeV using single lepton events

The CMS collaboration Sirunyan, Albert M ; Tumasyan, Armen ; Adam, Wolfgang ; et al.

JHEP 10 (2017) 019, 2017.

Inspire Record 1605128 DOI 10.17182/hepdata.79417

A search for top squark pair production in pp collisions at sqrt(s) = 13 TeV is performed using events with a single isolated electron or muon, jets, and a large transverse momentum imbalance. The results are based on data collected in 2016 with the CMS detector at the LHC, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 35.9 inverse femtobarns. No significant excess of events is observed above the expectation from standard model processes. Exclusion limits are set in the context of supersymmetric models of pair production of top squarks that decay either to a top quark and a neutralino or to a bottom quark and a chargino. Depending on the details of the model, we exclude top squarks with masses as high as 1120 GeV. Detailed information is also provided to facilitate theoretical interpretations in other scenarios of physics beyond the standard model.

10 data tables

Table 1

Result of the background estimates and data yields corresponding to 35.9 $\text{fb}^\text{$-$1}$ for the 27 signal regions.

Table 2

Result of the background estimates and data yields corresponding to 35.9 $\text{fb}^\text{$-$1}$ for the 4 signal regions dedicated to compressed spectra.

Table 3

The observed exclusion limits at 95% CL assuming 100% branching fraction for direct top squark pair production with decay $\widetilde{t}\widetilde{t} \rightarrow t \widetilde{\chi_1^0} t \widetilde{\chi_1^0}$.

More…

Date

Collaboration

Subject_areas

Phrases Reset

Reactions

Observables

CM Energies (GeV)

Authors

rivet Analysis
Searches for supersymmetry with the ATLAS detector using final states with two leptons and missing transverse momentum in sqrt{s} = 7 TeV proton-proton collisions

Searches for physics beyond the standard model with the $M_\mathrm{T2}$ variable in hadronic final states with and without disappearing tracks in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV

HistFactory
Searches for new phenomena in events with two leptons, jets, and missing transverse momentum in $139~\text{fb}^{-1}$ of $\sqrt{s}=13~$TeV $pp$ collisions with the ATLAS detector

Version 5

HistFactory
Searches for electroweak production of supersymmetric particles with compressed mass spectra in $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV $pp$ collisions with the ATLAS detector

Searches for additional Higgs bosons and for vector leptoquarks in $\tau\tau$ final states in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV

Search in diphoton and dielectron final states for displaced production of Higgs or $Z$ bosons with the ATLAS detector in $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV $pp$ collisions

Version 2

HistFactory
Search for trilepton resonances from chargino and neutralino pair production in $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV $pp$ collisions with the ATLAS detector

Search for top squarks and dark matter particles in opposite-charge dilepton final states at $\sqrt{s}=$ 13 TeV

Search for top squark production in fully-hadronic final states in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s} =$ 13 TeV

Search for top squark pair production in pp collisions at sqrt(s)=13 TeV using single lepton events

Date

Collaboration

Subject_areas

Phrases Reset

Reactions

Observables

CM Energies (GeV)

Authors

Version 5 HistFactory Searches for electroweak production of supersymmetric particles with compressed mass spectra in $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV $pp$ collisions with the ATLAS detector

Version 2 HistFactory Search for trilepton resonances from chargino and neutralino pair production in $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV $pp$ collisions with the ATLAS detector

Version 5

HistFactory
Searches for electroweak production of supersymmetric particles with compressed mass spectra in $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV $pp$ collisions with the ATLAS detector

Version 2

HistFactory
Search for trilepton resonances from chargino and neutralino pair production in $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV $pp$ collisions with the ATLAS detector