• Browse all
One-dimensional pion, kaon, and proton femtoscopy in Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm {NN}}}$ =2.76 TeV

The collaboration
Phys.Rev.C 92 (2015) 054908, 2015.

Abstract (data abstract)
CERN-LHC. The size of the particle emission region in high-energy collisions can be deduced using the femtoscopic correlations of particle pairs at low relative momentum. Such correlations arise due to quantum statistics and Coulomb and strong final state interactions. In this paper, results are presented from femtoscopic analyses of $\pi^{\pm}\pi^{\pm}$, ${\rm K}^{\pm}{\rm K}^{\pm}$, ${\rm K}^{0}_S{\rm K}^{0}_S$, ${\rm pp}$, and ${\rm \overline{p}}{\rm \overline{p}}$ correlations from Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm {NN}}}=2.76$ TeV by the ALICE experiment at the LHC. One-dimensional radii of the system are extracted from correlation functions in terms of the invariant momentum difference of the pair. The comparison of the measured radii with the predictions from a hydrokinetic model is discussed. The pion and kaon source radii display a monotonic decrease with increasing average pair transverse mass $m_{\rm T}$ which is consistent with hydrodynamic model predictions for central collisions. The kaon and proton source sizes can be reasonably described by approximate $m_{\rm T}$-scaling.

• #### Table 1

Data from Figure 4

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t1

Correlation function for ${\rm K^{\pm}}{\rm K^{\pm}}$ for centrality 0-10% and $\left < k_{\rm T} \right > = 0.35$ GeV/$c$.

• #### Table 2

Data from Figure 5

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t2

Correlation function for ${\rm K^{ 0}_S}{\rm K^{ 0}_S}$ for centrality 0-10% and $\left < k_{\rm T} \right > = 0.48$...

• #### Table 3

Data from Figure 6

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t3

Correlation function for ${\rm \overline{p}}{\rm \overline{p}}$ for centrality 0-10% and $\left < k_{\rm T} \right > = 1.0$ GeV/$c$.

• #### Table 4

Data from Figure 7

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t4

$\lambda_{{\rm \overline{p}}{\rm \overline{p}}}+\lambda_{{\rm \overline{p}} \overline{\Lambda}}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $0-10\%$ centrality for ${\rm \overline{p}}{\rm \overline{p}}$.

• #### Table 5

Data from Figure 7

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t5

$\lambda_{{\rm \overline{p}}{\rm \overline{p}}}+\lambda_{{\rm \overline{p}} \overline{\Lambda}}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $10-30\%$ centrality for ${\rm \overline{p}}{\rm \overline{p}}$.

• #### Table 6

Data from Figure 7

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t6

$\lambda_{{\rm \overline{p}}{\rm \overline{p}}}+\lambda_{{\rm \overline{p}} \overline{\Lambda}}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $30-50\%$ centrality for ${\rm \overline{p}}{\rm \overline{p}}$.

• #### Table 7

Data from Figure 7

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t7

$\lambda_{{\rm p}{\rm {p}}}+\lambda_{{\rm {p}}\Lambda}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $0-10\%$ centrality for ${\rm {p}}{\rm {p}}$.

• #### Table 8

Data from Figure 7

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t8

$\lambda_{{\rm p}{\rm {p}}}+\lambda_{{\rm {p}}\Lambda}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $10-30\%$ centrality for ${\rm {p}}{\rm {p}}$.

• #### Table 9

Data from Figure 7

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t9

$\lambda_{{\rm p}{\rm {p}}}+\lambda_{{\rm {p}}\Lambda}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $30-50\%$ centrality for ${\rm {p}}{\rm {p}}$.

• #### Table 10

Data from Figure 7

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t10

$\lambda$ parameter vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $0-10\%$ centrality for ${\rm K^{ 0}_S}{\rm K^{ 0}_S}$.

• #### Table 11

Data from Figure 7

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t11

$\lambda$ parameter vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $10-30\%$ centrality for ${\rm K^{ 0}_S}{\rm K^{ 0}_S}$.

• #### Table 12

Data from Figure 7

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t12

$\lambda$ parameter vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $30-50\%$ centrality for ${\rm K^{ 0}_S}{\rm K^{ 0}_S}$.

• #### Table 13

Data from Figure 7

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t13

$\lambda$ parameter vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $0-10\%$ centrality for ${\rm K^{\pm}}{\rm K^{\pm}}$.

• #### Table 14

Data from Figure 7

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t14

$\lambda$ parameter vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $10-30\%$ centrality for ${\rm K^{\pm}}{\rm K^{\pm}}$.

• #### Table 15

Data from Figure 7

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t15

$\lambda$ parameter vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $30-50\%$ centrality for ${\rm K^{\pm}}{\rm K^{\pm}}$.

• #### Table 16

Data from Figure 7

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t16

$\lambda$ parameter vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $0-10\%$ centrality for $\pi^{\pm}\pi^{\pm}$.

• #### Table 17

Data from Figure 7

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t17

$\lambda$ parameter vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $10-30\%$ centrality for $\pi^{\pm}\pi^{\pm}$.

• #### Table 18

Data from Figure 7

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t18

$\lambda$ parameter vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $30-50\%$ centrality for $\pi^{\pm}\pi^{\pm}$.

• #### Table 19

Data from Figure 8

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t19

$R_{\rm inv}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $0-10\%$ centrality for ${\rm \overline{p}}{\rm \overline{p}}$.

• #### Table 20

Data from Figure 8

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t20

$R_{\rm inv}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $10-30\%$ centrality for ${\rm \overline{p}}{\rm \overline{p}}$.

• #### Table 21

Data from Figure 8

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t21

$R_{\rm inv}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $30-50\%$ centrality for ${\rm \overline{p}}{\rm \overline{p}}$.

• #### Table 22

Data from Figure 8

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t22

$R_{\rm inv}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $0-10\%$ centrality for ${\rm {p}}{\rm {p}}$.

• #### Table 23

Data from Figure 8

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t23

$R_{\rm inv}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $10-30\%$ centrality for ${\rm {p}}{\rm {p}}$.

• #### Table 24

Data from Figure 8

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t24

$R_{\rm inv}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $30-50\%$ centrality for ${\rm {p}}{\rm {p}}$.

• #### Table 25

Data from Figure 8

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t25

$R_{\rm inv}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $0-10\%$ centrality for ${\rm K^{ 0}_S}{\rm K^{ 0}_S}$.

• #### Table 26

Data from Figure 8

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t26

$R_{\rm inv}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $10-30\%$ centrality for ${\rm K^{ 0}_S}{\rm K^{ 0}_S}$.

• #### Table 27

Data from Figure 8

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t27

$R_{\rm inv}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $30-50\%$ centrality for ${\rm K^{ 0}_S}{\rm K^{ 0}_S}$.

• #### Table 28

Data from Figure 8

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t28

$R_{\rm inv}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $0-10\%$ centrality for ${\rm K^{\pm}}{\rm K^{\pm}}$.

• #### Table 29

Data from Figure 8

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t29

$R_{\rm inv}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $10-30\%$ centrality for ${\rm K^{\pm}}{\rm K^{\pm}}$.

• #### Table 30

Data from Figure 8

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t30

$R_{\rm inv}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $30-50\%$ centrality for ${\rm K^{\pm}}{\rm K^{\pm}}$.

• #### Table 31

Data from Figure 8

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t31

$R_{\rm inv}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $0-10\%$ centrality for $\pi^{\pm}\pi^{\pm}$.

• #### Table 32

Data from Figure 8

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t32

$R_{\rm inv}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $10-30\%$ centrality for $\pi^{\pm}\pi^{\pm}$.

• #### Table 33

Data from Figure 8

10.17182/hepdata.72256.v1/t33

$R_{\rm inv}$ vs. $m_{\rm T}$ for $30-50\%$ centrality for $\pi^{\pm}\pi^{\pm}$.