CMSPASSUS16051  
Search for top squark pair production in the single lepton final state in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}= $ 13 TeV  
CMS Collaboration  
March 2017  
Abstract: 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 large transverse momentum imbalance. Results are based on a study of data from protonproton collisions collected in 2016 with the CMS detector at the LHC corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 35.9 fb$^{1}$. 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.  
Links:
CDS record (PDF) ;
inSPIRE record ;
CADI line (restricted) ;
These preliminary results are superseded in this paper, JHEP 10 (2017) 019. The superseded preliminary plots can be found here. 
Figures & Tables  Summary  Additional Figures & Tables  References  CMS Publications 

Additional information on efficiencies needed for reinterpretation of these results are available here and additional figures for speakers can be found here. 
Figures  
png pdf 
Figure 1:
Diagrams corresponding to top squark pair production, followed by the specific decay modes targeted in this note. Top left: $pp\rightarrow \tilde{t_1}\tilde{t_1}^*\rightarrow t^{(*)}\chi ^0_1\bar{t}^{(*)}\chi ^0_1$; top right: $pp\rightarrow \tilde{t_1}\tilde{t_1}^*\rightarrow b\chi ^+_1\bar{b}\chi ^_1$; bottom: $pp\rightarrow \tilde{t_1}\tilde{t_1}^*\rightarrow t^{(*)}\chi ^0_1b\chi ^+_1$. 
png pdf 
Figure 1a:
Diagram corresponding to top squark pair production and decay targeted in this note: $pp\rightarrow \tilde{t_1}\tilde{t_1}^*\rightarrow t^{(*)}\chi ^0_1\bar{t}^{(*)}\chi ^0_1$. 
png pdf 
Figure 1b:
Diagram corresponding to top squark pair production and decay targeted in this note: $pp\rightarrow \tilde{t_1}\tilde{t_1}^*\rightarrow b\chi ^+_1\bar{b}\chi ^_1$. 
png pdf 
Figure 1c:
Diagram corresponding to top squark pair production and decay targeted in this note: $pp\rightarrow \tilde{t_1}\tilde{t_1}^*\rightarrow t^{(*)}\chi ^0_1b\chi ^+_1$. 
png pdf 
Figure 2:
Distributions of ${E_{\mathrm {T}}^{\text {miss}}}$ for a topenriched control region of $\mathrm{ e } \mu$ events with at least one b tagged jet. 
png pdf 
Figure 3:
Comparison of the modeling of kinematic distributions in data and simulation relevant for the estimate of the single lepton backgrounds. (a) Comparison of the ${M_{\mathrm {\ell b}}}$ distribution in a control sample with 1 or 2 jets, with 60 $ < {M_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 120 GeV. The distribution is shown separately for events with 0 and $\geq $1 jet passing the medium btagging working point. The lower panel shows the ratio of the the transfer factors (TF) in data and simulation from the 0 tags to the $\geq 1$ tags samples. (b) The distribution of the number of btagged jets in the same control sample after tightening the ${E_{\mathrm {T}}^{\text {miss}}}$ requirement to 250 GeV. The shaded band shows the uncertainty resulting from a 50% systematic uncertainty on the heavy flavor component of the W+jets sample. (c) Comparison of the ${E_{\mathrm {T}}^{\text {miss}}}$ distribution between data and simulation in the $\gamma $+jets control region. The uncertainty shown is statisticalonly. 
png pdf 
Figure 3a:
Comparison of the ${M_{\mathrm {\ell b}}}$ distribution in a control sample with 1 or 2 jets, with 60 $ < {M_{\mathrm {T}}} < $ 120 GeV. The distribution is shown separately for events with 0 and $\geq $1 jet passing the medium btagging working point. The lower panel shows the ratio of the the transfer factors (TF) in data and simulation from the 0 tags to the $\geq 1$ tags samples. 
png pdf 
Figure 3b:
The distribution of the number of btagged jets in the same control sample after tightening the ${E_{\mathrm {T}}^{\text {miss}}}$ requirement to 250 GeV. The shaded band shows the uncertainty resulting from a 50% systematic uncertainty on the heavy flavor component of the W+jets sample. 
png pdf 
Figure 3c:
Comparison of the ${E_{\mathrm {T}}^{\text {miss}}}$ distribution between data and simulation in the $\gamma $+jets control region. The uncertainty shown is statisticalonly. 
png pdf 
Figure 4:
Observed data yields compared with SM background estimations for the 31 signal regions of Table 2 and 3. The uncertainties, which are the quadratic sums of statistical and systematic uncertainties, are shown as shaded bands. The expectations for three signal hypotheses are overlaid. The corresponding numbers in parentheses in the legend refer to the masses of the top squark and neutralino, respectively. 
png pdf root 
Figure 5:
The exclusion limits at 95% CL for direct topsquark production with decay $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } }_1 \to \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $. The interpretation is done in the two dimensional space of $m_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ vs. $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$. The color indicates the 95% CL upper limit on the cross section times branching fraction at each point in the $m_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } }_1 }$ vs. $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$ plane. The area to the left of and below the thick black curve represents the observed exclusion region at 95% CL, while the dashed red lines indicate the expected limit at 95% CL and their $\pm$1$ \sigma $ experiment standard deviation uncertainties. The thin black lines show the effect of the theoretical uncertainties ($\sigma _\mathrm {theory}$) on the signal cross section. The whited out region is discussed in Sec. 7. 
png pdf root 
Figure 6:
The exclusion limit at 95% CL for direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } }_1 \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } }_1 ^*\to \mathrm{ b \bar{b} } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $. The mass of the chargino is chosen to be $(m_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } }_1 } + m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })/2$. The interpretation is done in the two dimensional space of $m_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } }_1 }$ vs. $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$. The color indicates the 95% CL upper limit on the cross section times branching fraction at each point in the $m_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } }_1 }$ vs. $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$ plane. The area to the left of and below the thick black curve represents the observed exclusion region at 95% CL, while the dashed red lines indicate the expected limit at 95% CL and their $\pm$1$ \sigma $ experiment standard deviation uncertainties. The thin black lines show the effect of the theoretical uncertainties ($\sigma _\mathrm {theory}$) on the signal cross section. 
png pdf root 
Figure 7:
The exclusion limit at 95% CL for direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } }_1 \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } }_1 ^*\to \mathrm{ t } \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } ^{*}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 $. The mass splitting of the chargino and neutralino is fixed to 5 GeV. The interpretation is done in the two dimensional space of $m_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } }_1 }$ vs. $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$. The color indicates the 95% CL upper limit on the cross section times branching fraction at each point in the $m_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } }_1 }$ vs. $m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$ plane. The area to the left of and below the thick black curve represents the observed exclusion region at 95% CL, while the dashed red lines indicate the expected limit at 95% CL and their $\pm$1$ \sigma $ experiment standard deviation uncertainties. The thin black lines show the effect of the theoretical uncertainties ($\sigma _\mathrm {theory}$) on the signal cross section. 
png pdf 
Figure 8:
Exclusion limits at 95% CL for direct top squark pair production for the decay mode $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } }_1 \to \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $. The color indicates the 95% CL upper limit on the cross section times branching fraction at each point in the $m_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } }_1 }m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$ plane. The area to the left of and below the thick black curve represents the observed exclusion region at 95% CL, while the dashed red lines indicate the expected limits at 95% CL and their $\pm$1$ \sigma $ experiment standard deviation uncertainties. The thin black lines show the effect of the theoretical uncertainties $\sigma _\mathrm {theory}$ on the signal cross section. The magenta shortdashed, blue dotted, and longshortdashed orange curves show the expected limits for the fullyhdaronic [27], singlelepton and dilepton [28] analyses, respectively. 
png pdf 
Figure 9:
Exclusion limits at 95% CL for direct top squark pair production for the decay mode $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } }_1 \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{ \chi }^{+}_1 $, $\tilde{ \chi }^{+}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } ^{+}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 $. The mass of the chargino is chosen to be $(m_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } }_1 } + m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })/2$. The color indicates the 95% CL upper limit on the cross section times branching fraction at each point in the $m_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } }_1 }m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$ plane. The area to the left of and below the thick black curve represents the observed exclusion region at 95% CL, while the dashed red lines indicate the expected limits at 95% CL and their $\pm$1$ \sigma $ experiment standard deviation uncertainties. The thin black lines show the effect of the theoretical uncertainties $\sigma _\mathrm {theory}$ on the signal cross section. The magenta shortdashed, blue dotted, and longshortdashed orange curves show the expected limits for the fullyhdaronic [27], singlelepton and dilepton [28] analyses, respectively. 
png pdf root 
Figure 10:
Correlation matrix for the background predictions for the signal regions for the standard selection (in percent). The labelling of the regions follows the convention of Fig. {fig:results}. 
png pdf root 
Figure 11:
Correlation matrix for the background predictions for the signal regions for the compressed selection (in percent). The labelling of the regions follows the convention of Fig. {fig:results}. 
Tables  
png pdf 
Table 1:
Summary of the preselection. ${H_{\mathrm {T}}^{\mathrm {miss}}}$ is the magnitude of the vector sum of the transverse momenta of all jets and leptons in the event. The symbol $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} ^{\mathrm {lep}}$ denotes the transverse momentum of the lepton, while $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} ^{\mathrm {sum}}$ is the scalar sum of the transverse momenta of all PF candidates in a cone around the lepton but excluding the lepton. The radius of the cone is $\Delta R = $ 0.2 for $ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} ^{\mathrm {lep}} \le $ 50 GeV , and $\Delta R = $ Max(0.05, 10 GeV/$ {p_{\mathrm {T}}} ^{\mathrm {lep}}$) at higher values of lepton transverse momentum. 
png pdf 
Table 2:
Definitions for the 27 signal regions of the standard selection. At least one btagged jet (medium WP) is required in all search regions. To suppress the W+jets background in signal regions with $ {M_{\mathrm {\ell b}}} > $ 175 GeV, a more strict requirement that at least one jet satisfies the tight btagging WP is made. 
png pdf 
Table 3:
Summary of the compressed selection and the requirements for the four corresponding signal regions. The symbol $\Delta \phi ( {E_{\mathrm {T}}^{\text {miss}}} ,\ell ) $ denotes the angle between $ E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}} $ and the $\vec{p}_{\mathrm{T}}$ of the lepton. 
png pdf 
Table 4:
Dilepton control regions that are combined when estimating the LL background. 
png pdf 
Table 5:
Result of the background estimates and signal region yields corresponding to 35.9 fb${^{1}} $. 
png pdf 
Table 6:
Summary of the systematic uncertainties for the signal efficiency with their typical values in individual signal regions. 
png pdf 
Table 7:
Background predictions and data for aggregated signal regions. 
Summary 
We have reported on a search for top squark pair production in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = $ 13 TeV in events with a single isolated electron or muon, jets, and large $E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}}$ using 35.9 fb${^{1}}$ of data collected with the CMS detector during the 2016 run of the LHC. The event data counts are consistent with expectations from SM processes. The results are interpreted as exclusion limits in the context of supersymmetric models with pair production of top squarks that decay either to a top quark and a neutralino or to a bottom quark and a chargino. Assuming both top squarks decay to a top quark and a neutralino, we exclude at the 95% confidence level top squark masses up to 1120 GeV for a massless neutralino and neutralino masses up to 515 GeV for a 950 GeV top squark mass. 
Additional Figures  
png pdf root 
Additional Figure 1:
Comparison between postfit and prefit background predictions and data for 35.9 fb$^{1}$ collected during 2016 pp collisions. 
png pdf root 
Additional Figure 2:
Covariance matrix for the background predictions for the signal regions for the standard selection. The labelling of the regions follows the convention of correlation matrices in the appendix of the note. 
png pdf root 
Additional Figure 3:
Covariance matrix for the background predictions for the signal regions for the compressed selection. The labelling of the regions follows the convention of correlation matrices in the appendix of the note. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 4:
Significances for a model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ t } ^{(*)}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 $ as a function of $M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$. (a) Observed, (b) expected. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 4a:
Observed significance for a model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ t } ^{(*)}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 $ as a function of $M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 4b:
Expected significance for a model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ t } ^{(*)}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 $ as a function of $M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 5:
Significances for a model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} \to \mathrm{ b \bar{b} } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $ as a function of $M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$. The mass of the chargino is chosen to be $(M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } } + M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })/2$. (a) Observed, (b) expected. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 5a:
Observed significance for a model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} \to \mathrm{ b \bar{b} } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $ as a function of $M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$. The mass of the chargino is chosen to be $(M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } } + M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })/2$. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 5b:
Expected significance for a model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} \to \mathrm{ b \bar{b} } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $ as a function of $M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$. The mass of the chargino is chosen to be $(M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } } + M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })/2$. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 6:
Significances for a model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 / \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 } = m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }+ $ 5 GeV, BR($\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $) = BR($\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $) = 0.5 as a function of $M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$. (a) Observed, (b) expected. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 6a:
Observed significance for a model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 / \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 } = m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }+ $ 5 GeV, BR($\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $) = BR($\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $) = 0.5 as a function of $M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 6b:
Expected significance for a model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 / \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 } = m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }+ $ 5 GeV, BR($\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $) = BR($\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $) = 0.5 as a function of $M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$. 
png pdf root 
Additional Figure 7:
Exclusion limit for the model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 / \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 } = m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }+ $ 5 GeV as a function of $M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$ for various choices of the branching fraction between the two decays. (a) Observed, (b) expected. 
png pdf root 
Additional Figure 7a:
Observed exclusion limit for the model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 / \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 } = m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }+ $ 5 GeV as a function of $M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$ for various choices of the branching fraction between the two decays. 
png pdf root 
Additional Figure 7b:
Expected exclusion limit for the model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 / \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 } = m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }+ $ 5 GeV as a function of $M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$ for various choices of the branching fraction between the two decays. 
png pdf root 
Additional Figure 8:
Exclusion limit for the model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ t } ^{(*)}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 $ as a function of $M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$ for unpolarized top quarks (black lines), righthanded top quarks (red lines), and lefthanded top quarks (blue lines). 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 9:
Exclusion limits as presented in the note, with the addition of the most recent previous limits as presented during ICHEP 2016 or Moriond 2015. (a): for the model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ t } ^{(*)}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, (b): for the model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} \to \mathrm{ b \bar{b} } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $ as a function of $M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$. The mass of the chargino is chosen to be $(M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } } + M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })/2$, (c): for the model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 / \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 } = m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }+ $ 5 GeV, BR($\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $) = BR($\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $) = 0.5. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 9a:
Exclusion limits as presented in the note, with the addition of the most recent previous limits as presented during ICHEP 2016 or Moriond 2015, for the model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ t } ^{(*)}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 $. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 9b:
Exclusion limits as presented in the note, with the addition of the most recent previous limits as presented during ICHEP 2016 or Moriond 2015, for the model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} \to \mathrm{ b \bar{b} } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $ as a function of $M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$. The mass of the chargino is chosen to be $(M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } } + M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })/2$. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 9c:
Exclusion limits as presented in the note, with the addition of the most recent previous limits as presented during ICHEP 2016 or Moriond 2015, for the model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 / \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 } = m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }+ $ 5 GeV, BR($\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $) = BR($\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $) = 0.5. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 10:
Exclusion limits as presented in the note, however the color map is showing the 95% confidence level on the signal strength modifier. (a): for the model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ t } ^{(*)}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, (b): for the model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} \to \mathrm{ b \bar{b} } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $ as a function of $M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$. The mass of the chargino is chosen to be $(M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } } + M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })/2$, (c): for the model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 / \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 } = m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }+ $ 5 GeV, BR($\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $) = BR($\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $) = 0.5. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 10a:
Exclusion limits as presented in the note, however the color map is showing the 95% confidence level on the signal strength modifier, for the model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ t } ^{(*)}\tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 10b:
Exclusion limits as presented in the note, however the color map is showing the 95% confidence level on the signal strength modifier, for the model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} \to \mathrm{ b \bar{b} } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $ as a function of $M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }$ and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }$. The mass of the chargino is chosen to be $(M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } } + M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })/2$, 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 10c:
Exclusion limits as presented in the note, however the color map is showing the 95% confidence level on the signal strength modifier, for the model of direct topsquark production with decay $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \overline{\tilde{\mathrm{t}}} $, $\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 / \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $, $m_{\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 } = m_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 }+ $ 5 GeV, BR($\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $) = BR($\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $) = 0.5. 
png pdf 
Additional Figure 11:
Background predictions and data for the aggregated signal regions using 35.9 fb$^{1}$collected during 2016 pp collisions. 
Additional Tables  
png pdf 
Additional Table 1:
Cutflow table for $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } ^{*}\to \mathrm{ t \bar{t} } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $ signals for an integrated luminosity of 35.9 fb$^{1}$. The uncertainties are purely statistical. No correction for signal contamination in data control regions are applied. 
png pdf 
Additional Table 2:
Cutflow table for $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } ^{*}, \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 / \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $ signals for an integrated luminosity of 35.9 fb$^{1}$. The branching fraction for this model is BR($\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ t } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $) = BR($\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \to \mathrm{ b } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $) = 0.5, and $M_{\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 } = M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 } + 5 GeV $. The uncertainties are purely statistical. No correction for signal contamination in data control regions are applied. 
png pdf 
Additional Table 3:
Cutflow table for $\mathrm{ p } \mathrm{ p } \to \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } \tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } ^{*}\to \mathrm{ b \bar{b} } \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 $, $\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 \to \mathrm{ W } \tilde{\chi}^0_1 $ signals with $M_{\tilde{\chi}^{\pm}_1 } = (M_{\tilde{ \mathrm{ t } } }+M_{\tilde{\chi}^0_1 })/2$ for an integrated luminosity of 35.9 fb$^{1}$. The uncertainties are purely statistical. No correction for signal contamination in data control regions are applied. 
Electronic version of the limit curves can be found as three rootfiles
here,
here, and
here.
The correlation and covariance matrices can be found as two rootfiles here, and here. A code snippet to calculate the t_{mod} variables together with an example how to use it is provided here. 
References  
1  ATLAS Collaboration  Search for top squarks in final states with one isolated lepton, jets, and missing transverse momentum in $ \sqrt{s}=13 $ TeV $ pp $ collisions with the ATLAS detector  PRD 94 (2016), no. 5, 052009  1606.03903 
2  CMS Collaboration  Searches for pair production for thirdgeneration squarks in sqrt(s)=13 TeV pp collisions  CMSSUS16008 1612.03877 

3  CMS Collaboration  Search for supersymmetry in the allhadronic final state using top quark tagging in pp collisions at $ \sqrt{s} $ = 13 TeV  CMSSUS16009 1701.01954 

4  CMS Collaboration  The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC  JINST 3 (2008) S08004  CMS00001 
5  J. Alwall et al.  The automated computation of treelevel and nexttoleading order differential cross sections, and their matching to parton shower simulations  JHEP 07 (2014) 079  1405.0301 
6  NNPDF Collaboration  Parton distributions for the LHC Run II  JHEP 04 (2015) 040  1410.8849 
7  P. Nason  A new method for combining NLO QCD with shower Monte Carlo algorithms  JHEP 11 (2004) 040  hepph/0409146 
8  S. Frixione, P. Nason, and C. Oleari  Matching NLO QCD computations with parton shower simulations: the $ POWHEG $ method  JHEP 11 (2007) 070  0709.2092 
9  S. Alioli, P. Nason, C. Oleari, and E. Re  A general framework for implementing NLO calculations in shower Monte Carlo programs: the $ POWHEG $ BOX  JHEP 06 (2010) 043  1002.2581 
10  E. Re  Singletop $ Wt $channel production matched with parton showers using the POWHEG method  EPJC 71 (2011) 1547  1009.2450 
11  T. Sj\"ostrand et al.  An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2  CPC 191 (2015) 159  1410.3012 
12  GEANT4 Collaboration  GEANT4a simulation toolkit  NIMA 506 (2003) 250  
13  S. Abdullin et al.  The fast simulation of the CMS detector at LHC  J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 331 (2011) 032049  
14  CMS Collaboration  ParticleFlow Event Reconstruction in CMS and Performance for Jets, Taus, and $ E_{\mathrm{T}}^{\text{miss}} $  CDS  
15  CMS Collaboration  Commissioning of the Particleflow Event Reconstruction with the first LHC collisions recorded in the CMS detector  CDS  
16  CMS Collaboration  Performance of electron reconstruction and selection with the CMS detector in protonproton collisions at $ \sqrt{s} = 8 $~TeV  JINST 10 (2015) P06005  CMSEGM13001 1502.02701 
17  CMS Collaboration  Performance of CMS muon reconstruction in pp collision events at $ \sqrt{s}=7 $ TeV  JINST 7 (2012) P10002  CMSMUO10004 1206.4071 
18  M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez  The anti$ k_\mathrm{T} $ jet clustering algorithm  JHEP 04 (2008) 063  0802.1189 
19  M. Cacciari and G. P. Salam  Pileup subtraction using jet areas  PLB 659 (2008) 119  0707.1378 
20  CMS Collaboration  Identification of bquark jets with the CMS experiment  JINST 8 (2013) P04013  CMSBTV12001 1211.4462 
21  CMS Collaboration  Missing transverse energy performance of the CMS detector  JINST 6 (2011) P09001  CMSJME10009 1106.5048 
22  M. L. Graesser and J. Shelton  Hunting Mixed Top Squark Decays  PRL 111 (2013) 121802  1212.4495 
23  A. L. Read  Presentation of search results: the $ CL_{S} $ technique  JPG 28 (2002) 2693  
24  T. Junk  Confidence level computation for combining searches with small statistics  NIMA 434 (1999) 435  hepex/9902006 
25  G. Cowan, K. Cranmer, E. Gross, and O. Vitells  Asymptotic formulae for likelihoodbased tests of new physics  EPJC 71 (2011) 1554, , [Erratum: Eur. Phys. J.C73,2501(2013)]  1007.1727 
26  ATLAS and CMS Collaborations, LHC Higgs Combination Group  Procedure for the LHC Higgs boson search combination in Summer 2011  Technical Report ATLPHYSPUB 201111, CMS NOTE 2011/005  
27  CMS Collaboration  Search for direct top squark pair production in the fully hadronic final state at $ 13 \mathrm{TeV} $  Technical Report CMSPASSUS16049, CERN, Geneva  
28  CMS Collaboration  Search for direct top squark pair production in the dilepton final state at $ 13 \mathrm{TeV} $  Technical Report CMSPASSUS17001, CERN, Geneva  
29  CMS Collaboration  Simplified likelihood for the reinterpretation of public CMS results  CDS 
Compact Muon Solenoid LHC, CERN 