Reference multiplicity distributions obtained from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV data (black markers), Glauber model (red histogram), and unfolding approach to separate single and pileup contributions. Vertical lines represent statistical uncertainties. Single, pileup, and single+pileup collisions are shown in solid blue markers, dashed green, and dashed pink lines, respectively. The 0–5% central events and 5–60% mid-central to peripheral events are indicated by black arrows. The ratio of the single+pileup to the measured multiplicity distribution is shown in the lower panel.

Reference multiplicity distributions obtained from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV data (black markers), Glauber model (red histogram), and unfolding approach to separate single and pileup contributions. Vertical lines represent statistical uncertainties. Single, pileup, and single+pileup collisions are shown in solid blue markers, dashed green, and dashed pink lines, respectively. The 0–5% central events and 5–60% mid-central to peripheral events are indicated by black arrows. The ratio of the single+pileup to the measured multiplicity distribution is shown in the lower panel.

Proton cumulants as a function of reference multiplicity (black circles) from $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV Au+Au collisions. Centrality-binned results with and without centrality bin width corrections are represented by red circles and blue squares, respectively. Vertical dashed lines indicate the centrality classes, from right to left: 0–5%, 5–10%, 10–20%. Data points in this figure are only corrected for detector efficiency but not for the pileup effect, which will be discussed in a later section.

Proton cumulants as a function of reference multiplicity (black circles) from $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV Au+Au collisions. Centrality-binned results with and without centrality bin width corrections are represented by red circles and blue squares, respectively. Vertical dashed lines indicate the centrality classes, from right to left: 0–5%, 5–10%, 10–20%. Data points in this figure are only corrected for detector efficiency but not for the pileup effect, which will be discussed in a later section.

Proton cumulants as a function of reference multiplicity (black circles) from $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV Au+Au collisions. Centrality-binned results with and without centrality bin width corrections are represented by red circles and blue squares, respectively. Vertical dashed lines indicate the centrality classes, from right to left: 0–5%, 5–10%, 10–20%. Data points in this figure are only corrected for detector efficiency but not for the pileup effect, which will be discussed in a later section.

Proton cumulants as a function of reference multiplicity from $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV Au+Au collisions. Pileup corrected and uncorrected cumulants as a function of reference multiplicity are represented by black circles and blue open squares, respectively. Red circles and blue-filled squares represent the results of centrality binned data.

Proton cumulants as a function of reference multiplicity from $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV Au+Au collisions. Pileup corrected and uncorrected cumulants as a function of reference multiplicity are represented by black circles and blue open squares, respectively. Red circles and blue-filled squares represent the results of centrality binned data.

Ratios of proton cumulants as a function of reference multiplicity from $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV Au+Au collisions. Pileup corrected and uncorrected cumulants are represented by black circles and blue open squares, respectively. Red circles and blue-filled squares represent the results of centrality binned data.

Ratios of proton cumulants as a function of reference multiplicity from $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV Au+Au collisions. Pileup corrected and uncorrected cumulants are represented by black circles and blue open squares, respectively. Red circles and blue-filled squares represent the results of centrality binned data.

UrQMD results of the proton cumulant ratios up to sixth order in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$= 3 GeV. The black circles are without VF correction while blue squares and red triangles are results with VFC which used $N_{\rm part}$ distributions from UrQMD and Glauber models, respectively. The blue crosses are calculations using UrQMD events with b $\leq$ 3 fm. The above results are applied CBWC except for the one (blue crosses) using b $\leq$3 fm events.

UrQMD results of the proton cumulant ratios up to sixth order in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$= 3 GeV. The black circles are without VF correction while blue squares and red triangles are results with VFC which used $N_{\rm part}$ distributions from UrQMD and Glauber models, respectively. The blue crosses are calculations using UrQMD events with b $\leq$ 3 fm. The above results are applied CBWC except for the one (blue crosses) using b $\leq$3 fm events.

Proton cumulants up to sixth order in $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV Au+Au collisions. Data without volume fluctuation correction is shown as grey open squares while data with volume fluctuation correction using $N_{\rm part}$ distributions from Glauber and UrQMD models are shown as black circles and black open triangles, respectively. The corresponding centrality binned cumulants are shown in blue squares, red circles, and orange triangles, respectively. Similarly to Fig. 6, the vertical dashed lines indicate the centrality classes.

Proton cumulants up to sixth order in $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV Au+Au collisions. Data without volume fluctuation correction is shown as grey open squares while data with volume fluctuation correction using $N_{\rm part}$ distributions from Glauber and UrQMD models are shown as black circles and black open triangles, respectively. The corresponding centrality binned cumulants are shown in blue squares, red circles, and orange triangles, respectively. Similarly to Fig. 6, the vertical dashed lines indicate the centrality classes.

Proton cumulant ratios up to sixth order in $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV Au+Au collisions. Data without volume fluctuation correction are shown as grey open squares while data with volume fluctuation correction using $N_{\rm part}$ distributions from Glauber and UrQMD models are shown as black circles and black open triangles, respectively. The corresponding centrality binned cumulants are shown in blue squares, red circles, and orange triangles, respectively. Similarly to Fig. 6, the vertical dashed lines indicate the centrality classes.

Proton cumulant ratios up to sixth order in $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV Au+Au collisions. Data without volume fluctuation correction are shown as grey open squares while data with volume fluctuation correction using $N_{\rm part}$ distributions from Glauber and UrQMD models are shown as black circles and black open triangles, respectively. The corresponding centrality binned cumulants are shown in blue squares, red circles, and orange triangles, respectively. Similarly to Fig. 6, the vertical dashed lines indicate the centrality classes.

UrQMD results of proton cumulant ratios up to sixth order in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV. The vertical dashed lines indicate the centrality classes.

Experimental results on centrality dependence of cumulants (left panels) and cumulant ratios (right panels) up to sixth order of the proton multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at $N_{\rm part}$ = 3 GeV. The open squares are data without VF correction while red circles and blue triangles are results with VF correction with $N_{\rm part}$ distributions from Glauber and UrQMD models, respectively.

Experimental results on centrality dependence of cumulants (left panels) and cumulant ratios (right panels) up to sixth order of the proton multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at $N_{\rm part}$ = 3 GeV. The open squares are data without VF correction while red circles and blue triangles are results with VF correction with $N_{\rm part}$ distributions from Glauber and UrQMD models, respectively.

Same as Fig. 14 but for correlation function (left panels) and their normalized ratios (right panels).

Same as Fig. 14 but for correlation function (left panels) and their normalized ratios (right panels).

Cumulants and cumulant ratios of proton multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV. The transverse momentum window is $p_{\rm T}$ from $0.4<p_{\rm T}<2.0$ GeV/$c$ and the rapidity window is $−0.5<y<0$. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are represented by black and gray bars, respectively. UrQMD predictions are depicted by gold bands.

Cumulants and cumulant ratios of proton multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV. The transverse momentum window is $p_{\rm T}$ from $0.4<p_{\rm T}<2.0$ GeV/$c$ and the rapidity window is $−0.5<y<0$. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are represented by black and gray bars, respectively. UrQMD predictions are depicted by gold bands.

Same as Fig. 16 but for correlation functions and correlation function ratios of proton multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV.

Same as Fig. 16 but for correlation functions and correlation function ratios of proton multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV.

The transverse-momentum and rapidity dependence of cumulant ratios of proton multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV. In the left column, the $p_{\rm T}$ analysis window is $0.4<p_{\rm T}<2.0$ GeV/$c$ while the rapidity window is varied in the range $y_{\rm min}<y<0$. In the right column, the rapidit$y$ analysis window is $−0.5<y<0$ while the $p_{\rm T}$ is varied in the range $0.4<p_{\rm T}<p_{\rm T}^{\rm max}$ GeV/$c$. The most central (0–5%) and peripheral (50–60%) events are depicted by black squares and blue triangles, respectively. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are represented by black and gray bars, respectively. UrQMD simulations for the top 0–5% and 50–60% are shown by gold and blue bands, respectively.

The transverse-momentum and rapidity dependence of cumulant ratios of proton multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV. In the left column, the $p_{\rm T}$ analysis window is $0.4<p_{\rm T}<2.0$ GeV/$c$ while the rapidity window is varied in the range $y_{\rm min}<y<0$. In the right column, the rapidit$y$ analysis window is $−0.5<y<0$ while the $p_{\rm T}$ is varied in the range $0.4<p_{\rm T}<p_{\rm T}^{\rm max}$ GeV/$c$. The most central (0–5%) and peripheral (50–60%) events are depicted by black squares and blue triangles, respectively. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are represented by black and gray bars, respectively. UrQMD simulations for the top 0–5% and 50–60% are shown by gold and blue bands, respectively.

The transverse-momentum and rapidity dependence of cumulant ratios of proton multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV. In the left column, the $p_{\rm T}$ analysis window is $0.4<p_{\rm T}<2.0$ GeV/$c$ while the rapidity window is varied in the range $y_{\rm min}<y<0$. In the right column, the rapidit$y$ analysis window is $−0.5<y<0$ while the $p_{\rm T}$ is varied in the range $0.4<p_{\rm T}<p_{\rm T}^{\rm max}$ GeV/$c$. The most central (0–5%) and peripheral (50–60%) events are depicted by black squares and blue triangles, respectively. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are represented by black and gray bars, respectively. UrQMD simulations for the top 0–5% and 50–60% are shown by gold and blue bands, respectively.

The transverse-momentum and rapidity dependence of cumulant ratios of proton multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV. In the left column, the $p_{\rm T}$ analysis window is $0.4<p_{\rm T}<2.0$ GeV/$c$ while the rapidity window is varied in the range $y_{\rm min}<y<0$. In the right column, the rapidit$y$ analysis window is $−0.5<y<0$ while the $p_{\rm T}$ is varied in the range $0.4<p_{\rm T}<p_{\rm T}^{\rm max}$ GeV/$c$. The most central (0–5%) and peripheral (50–60%) events are depicted by black squares and blue triangles, respectively. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are represented by black and gray bars, respectively. UrQMD simulations for the top 0–5% and 50–60% are shown by gold and blue bands, respectively.

As in Fig. 18 but for transverse-momentum and rapidity dependence of correlation function ratios of proton multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV.

As in Fig. 18 but for transverse-momentum and rapidity dependence of correlation function ratios of proton multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV.

As in Fig. 18 but for transverse-momentum and rapidity dependence of correlation function ratios of proton multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV.

As in Fig. 18 but for transverse-momentum and rapidity dependence of correlation function ratios of proton multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV.

Collision energy dependence of the cumulant ratios: $C_2/C_1=\sigma/M$, $C_3/C_2=S\sigma$, and $C_4/C_2=\kappa\sigma^2$, for protons (open squares) and net protons (red circles) from top 0–5% (top panels) and 50–60% (bottom panels) Au+Au collisions at RHIC. The points for protons are shifted horizontally for clarity. The new result for protons from $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV Au+Au collisions is shown as a filled square. UrQMD results with $|y|<0.5$ for protons are shown as gold bands while those for net protons are shown as green dashed lines or green bands. At 3GeV, the model results for protons (−0.5) are shown as blue crosses. UrQMD results of proton and net-proton $C_4/C_2$, see right panels, are almost totally overlapped. The open cross is the result of the model with a fixed impact parameter $b < 3$ fm. The hydrodynamic calculations, for 5% central Au+Au collisions, for protons from $|y|<0.5$ are shown as dashed red linea and the result of the 3 GeV protons from $−0.5<y<0$ is shown as an open red star.

Collision energy dependence of the cumulant ratios: $C_2/C_1=\sigma/M$, $C_3/C_2=S\sigma$, and $C_4/C_2=\kappa\sigma^2$, for protons (open squares) and net protons (red circles) from top 0–5% (top panels) and 50–60% (bottom panels) Au+Au collisions at RHIC. The points for protons are shifted horizontally for clarity. The new result for protons from $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV Au+Au collisions is shown as a filled square. UrQMD results with $|y|<0.5$ for protons are shown as gold bands while those for net protons are shown as green dashed lines or green bands. At 3GeV, the model results for protons (−0.5) are shown as blue crosses. UrQMD results of proton and net-proton $C_4/C_2$, see right panels, are almost totally overlapped. The open cross is the result of the model with a fixed impact parameter $b < 3$ fm. The hydrodynamic calculations, for 5% central Au+Au collisions, for protons from $|y|<0.5$ are shown as dashed red linea and the result of the 3 GeV protons from $−0.5<y<0$ is shown as an open red star.

Collision energy dependence of the cumulant ratios: $C_2/C_1=\sigma/M$, $C_3/C_2=S\sigma$, and $C_4/C_2=\kappa\sigma^2$, for protons (open squares) and net protons (red circles) from top 0–5% (top panels) and 50–60% (bottom panels) Au+Au collisions at RHIC. The points for protons are shifted horizontally for clarity. The new result for protons from $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV Au+Au collisions is shown as a filled square. UrQMD results with $|y|<0.5$ for protons are shown as gold bands while those for net protons are shown as green dashed lines or green bands. At 3GeV, the model results for protons (−0.5) are shown as blue crosses. UrQMD results of proton and net-proton $C_4/C_2$, see right panels, are almost totally overlapped. The open cross is the result of the model with a fixed impact parameter $b < 3$ fm. The hydrodynamic calculations, for 5% central Au+Au collisions, for protons from $|y|<0.5$ are shown as dashed red linea and the result of the 3 GeV protons from $−0.5<y<0$ is shown as an open red star.

Collision energy dependence of the cumulant ratios: $C_2/C_1=\sigma/M$, $C_3/C_2=S\sigma$, and $C_4/C_2=\kappa\sigma^2$, for protons (open squares) and net protons (red circles) from top 0–5% (top panels) and 50–60% (bottom panels) Au+Au collisions at RHIC. The points for protons are shifted horizontally for clarity. The new result for protons from $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV Au+Au collisions is shown as a filled square. UrQMD results with $|y|<0.5$ for protons are shown as gold bands while those for net protons are shown as green dashed lines or green bands. At 3GeV, the model results for protons (−0.5) are shown as blue crosses. UrQMD results of proton and net-proton $C_4/C_2$, see right panels, are almost totally overlapped. The open cross is the result of the model with a fixed impact parameter $b < 3$ fm. The hydrodynamic calculations, for 5% central Au+Au collisions, for protons from $|y|<0.5$ are shown as dashed red linea and the result of the 3 GeV protons from $−0.5<y<0$ is shown as an open red star.

Collision energy dependence of the cumulant ratios: $C_2/C_1=\sigma/M$, $C_3/C_2=S\sigma$, and $C_4/C_2=\kappa\sigma^2$, for protons (open squares) and net protons (red circles) from top 0–5% (top panels) and 50–60% (bottom panels) Au+Au collisions at RHIC. The points for protons are shifted horizontally for clarity. The new result for protons from $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV Au+Au collisions is shown as a filled square. UrQMD results with $|y|<0.5$ for protons are shown as gold bands while those for net protons are shown as green dashed lines or green bands. At 3GeV, the model results for protons (−0.5) are shown as blue crosses. UrQMD results of proton and net-proton $C_4/C_2$, see right panels, are almost totally overlapped. The open cross is the result of the model with a fixed impact parameter $b < 3$ fm. The hydrodynamic calculations, for 5% central Au+Au collisions, for protons from $|y|<0.5$ are shown as dashed red linea and the result of the 3 GeV protons from $−0.5<y<0$ is shown as an open red star.

Collision energy dependence of the cumulant ratios: $C_2/C_1=\sigma/M$, $C_3/C_2=S\sigma$, and $C_4/C_2=\kappa\sigma^2$, for protons (open squares) and net protons (red circles) from top 0–5% (top panels) and 50–60% (bottom panels) Au+Au collisions at RHIC. The points for protons are shifted horizontally for clarity. The new result for protons from $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 3 GeV Au+Au collisions is shown as a filled square. UrQMD results with $|y|<0.5$ for protons are shown as gold bands while those for net protons are shown as green dashed lines or green bands. At 3GeV, the model results for protons (−0.5) are shown as blue crosses. UrQMD results of proton and net-proton $C_4/C_2$, see right panels, are almost totally overlapped. The open cross is the result of the model with a fixed impact parameter $b < 3$ fm. The hydrodynamic calculations, for 5% central Au+Au collisions, for protons from $|y|<0.5$ are shown as dashed red linea and the result of the 3 GeV protons from $−0.5<y<0$ is shown as an open red star.

'Identified transverse momentum spectra of $\pi^{-}$ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 193 GeV'

'Identified transverse momentum spectra of $K^{-}$ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 193 GeV'

'Identified transverse momentum spectra of $\bar{p}$ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 193 GeV'

'Average transverse momentum as a function of $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ for $\pi^{+}$ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 193 GeV.'

'Average transverse momentum as a function of $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ for $K^{+}$ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 193 GeV.'

'Average transverse momentum as a function of $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ for p at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 193 GeV.'

'dN/dy scaled by 0.5 × $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ as a function of $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ for $\pi^{+}$ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 193 GeV.'

'dN/dy scaled by 0.5 × $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ as a function of $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ for $K^{+}$ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 193 GeV.'

'dN/dy scaled by 0.5 × $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ as a function of $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ for p at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 193 GeV.'

'dN/dy scaled by 0.5 × $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ as a function of $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ for $\bar{p}$ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 193 GeV.'

'$\pi^{−}$/$\pi^{+}$ ratio as a function of $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 193 GeV.'

'$K^{−}$/$K^{+}$ ratio as a function of $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 193 GeV.'

'$\bar{p}$/p ratio as a function of $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 193 GeV.'

'$K^{+}$/$\pi^{+}$ ratio as a function of $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 193 GeV.'

'$K^{-}$/$\pi^{-}$ ratio as a function of $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 193 GeV.'

'p/$\pi^{+}$ ratio as a function of $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 193 GeV.'

'$\bar{p}$/$\pi^{-}$ ratio as a function of $\langle$N$_{part}$$\rangle$ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 193 GeV.'

Inclusive jet asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). The top panel shows results for jets that scatter forward relative to the polarized beam ($x_{F} > 0$).

Inclusive jet asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). the bottom panel shows jets that scatter backward to the polarized beam ($x_{F} < 0$).

Inclusive jet asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$ for jets that contain a charged pion with $z > 0.3$. The blue circles are for jets containing a high-$z$ $\pi^{+}$, while red squares are for jets containing a high-$z$ $\pi^{-}$.

Inclusive jet asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$ for jets that contain a charged pion with $z > 0.3$. The blue circles are for jets containing a high-$z$ $\pi^{+}$, while red squares are for jets containing a high-$z$ $\pi^{-}$.

Collins-like asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). The top panel shows results for jets that scatter forward relative to the polarized beam ($x_{F} > 0$).

Collins-like asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). The top panel shows results for jets that scatter forward relative to the polarized beam ($x_{F} > 0$).

Collins-like asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). The bottom panel shows jets that scatter backward with respect to the polarized beam ($x_{F} < 0$).

Collins-like asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). The bottom panel shows jets that scatter backward with respect to the polarized beam ($x_{F} < 0$).

Collins-like asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins-like asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins-like asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins-like asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins-like asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins-like asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins-like asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins-like asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins-like asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins-like asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins-like asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins-like asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-2\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$ separately for the 2012 and 2015 data. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). The top panel shows the results for jets that scatter forward relative to the polarized beam ($x_{F} > 0$), while the bottom panel shows jets that scatter backward to the polarized beam ($x_{F} < 0$).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$ separately for the 2012 and 2015 data. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). The top panel shows the results for jets that scatter forward relative to the polarized beam ($x_{F} > 0$), while the bottom panel shows jets that scatter backward to the polarized beam ($x_{F} < 0$).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$ separately for the 2012 and 2015 data. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). The top panel shows the results for jets that scatter forward relative to the polarized beam ($x_{F} > 0$), while the bottom panel shows jets that scatter backward to the polarized beam ($x_{F} < 0$).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$ separately for the 2012 and 2015 data. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). The top panel shows the results for jets that scatter forward relative to the polarized beam ($x_{F} > 0$), while the bottom panel shows jets that scatter backward to the polarized beam ($x_{F} < 0$).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$ separately for the 2012 and 2015 data. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). The top panel shows the results for jets that scatter forward relative to the polarized beam ($x_{F} > 0$), while the bottom panel shows jets that scatter backward to the polarized beam ($x_{F} < 0$).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$ separately for the 2012 and 2015 data. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). The top panel shows the results for jets that scatter forward relative to the polarized beam ($x_{F} > 0$), while the bottom panel shows jets that scatter backward to the polarized beam ($x_{F} < 0$).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$ separately for the 2012 and 2015 data. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). The top panel shows the results for jets that scatter forward relative to the polarized beam ($x_{F} > 0$), while the bottom panel shows jets that scatter backward to the polarized beam ($x_{F} < 0$).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$ separately for the 2012 and 2015 data. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). The top panel shows the results for jets that scatter forward relative to the polarized beam ($x_{F} > 0$), while the bottom panel shows jets that scatter backward to the polarized beam ($x_{F} < 0$).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). The top panel shows the results for jets that scatter forward relative to the polarized beam ($x_{F} > 0$), while the bottom panel shows jets that scatter backward to the polarized beam ($x_{F} < 0$).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). The top panel shows the results for jets that scatter forward relative to the polarized beam ($x_{F} > 0$), while the bottom panel shows jets that scatter backward to the polarized beam ($x_{F} < 0$).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). The top panel shows the results for jets that scatter forward relative to the polarized beam ($x_{F} > 0$), while the bottom panel shows jets that scatter backward to the polarized beam ($x_{F} < 0$).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and jet-$p_{T}$ (horizontal). The top panel shows the results for jets that scatter forward relative to the polarized beam ($x_{F} > 0$), while the bottom panel shows jets that scatter backward to the polarized beam ($x_{F} < 0$).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins, integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins, integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins, integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins, integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins, integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins, integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins, integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins, integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet $x_{T}~(= 2 p_T/\sqrt{s}$). The solid points show the results from this analysis of $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV $pp$ collisions, while the open points show previous STAR results for $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV $pp$ collisions from data recorded during 2011.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet $x_{T}~(= 2 p_T/\sqrt{s}$). The solid points show the results from this analysis of $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV $pp$ collisions, while the open points show previous STAR results for $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV $pp$ collisions from data recorded during 2011.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet $x_{T}~(= 2 p_T/\sqrt{s}$). The solid points show the results from this analysis of $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV $pp$ collisions, while the open points show previous STAR results for $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV $pp$ collisions from data recorded during 2011.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet $x_{T}~(= 2 p_T/\sqrt{s}$). The solid points show the results from this analysis of $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV $pp$ collisions, while the open points show previous STAR results for $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV $pp$ collisions from data recorded during 2011.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins. The solid points show the results from this analysis of $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV $pp$ collisions, while the open points show previous STAR results for $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV $pp$ collisions from data recorded during 2011.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins. The solid points show the results from this analysis of $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV $pp$ collisions, while the open points show previous STAR results for $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV $pp$ collisions from data recorded during 2011.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins. The solid points show the results from this analysis of $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV $pp$ collisions, while the open points show previous STAR results for $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV $pp$ collisions from data recorded during 2011.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins. The solid points show the results from this analysis of $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV $pp$ collisions, while the open points show previous STAR results for $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV $pp$ collisions from data recorded during 2011.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins. The solid points show the results from this analysis of $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV $pp$ collisions, while the open points show previous STAR results for $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV $pp$ collisions from data recorded during 2011.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins. The solid points show the results from this analysis of $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV $pp$ collisions, while the open points show previous STAR results for $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV $pp$ collisions from data recorded during 2011.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins. The solid points show the results from this analysis of $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV $pp$ collisions, while the open points show previous STAR results for $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV $pp$ collisions from data recorded during 2011.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins. The solid points show the results from this analysis of $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV $pp$ collisions, while the open points show previous STAR results for $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV $pp$ collisions from data recorded during 2011.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins. The solid points show the results from this analysis of $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV $pp$ collisions, while the open points show previous STAR results for $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV $pp$ collisions from data recorded during 2011.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins. The solid points show the results from this analysis of $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV $pp$ collisions, while the open points show previous STAR results for $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV $pp$ collisions from data recorded during 2011.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins. The solid points show the results from this analysis of $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV $pp$ collisions, while the open points show previous STAR results for $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV $pp$ collisions from data recorded during 2011.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins. The solid points show the results from this analysis of $\sqrt{s} = 200$ GeV $pp$ collisions, while the open points show previous STAR results for $\sqrt{s} = 500$ GeV $pp$ collisions from data recorded during 2011.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$, hadron-$z$, and hadron-$j_{T}$ for charged kaons (upper panels) and protons (lower panels) inside jets. In both cases, the $p_T$ dependence is shown integrated over the full ranges of $z$ and $j_T$, while the $z$ and $j_T$ dependences are shown integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represent the systematic uncertainties.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$, hadron-$z$, and hadron-$j_{T}$ for charged kaons (upper panels) and protons (lower panels) inside jets. In both cases, the $p_T$ dependence is shown integrated over the full ranges of $z$ and $j_T$, while the $z$ and $j_T$ dependences are shown integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represent the systematic uncertainties.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$, hadron-$z$, and hadron-$j_{T}$ for charged kaons (upper panels) and protons (lower panels) inside jets. In both cases, the $p_T$ dependence is shown integrated over the full ranges of $z$ and $j_T$, while the $z$ and $j_T$ dependences are shown integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represent the systematic uncertainties.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$, hadron-$z$, and hadron-$j_{T}$ for charged kaons (upper panels) and protons (lower panels) inside jets. In both cases, the $p_T$ dependence is shown integrated over the full ranges of $z$ and $j_T$, while the $z$ and $j_T$ dependences are shown integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represent the systematic uncertainties.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$, hadron-$z$, and hadron-$j_{T}$ for charged kaons (upper panels) and protons (lower panels) inside jets. In both cases, the $p_T$ dependence is shown integrated over the full ranges of $z$ and $j_T$, while the $z$ and $j_T$ dependences are shown integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represent the systematic uncertainties.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$, hadron-$z$, and hadron-$j_{T}$ for charged kaons (upper panels) and protons (lower panels) inside jets. In both cases, the $p_T$ dependence is shown integrated over the full ranges of $z$ and $j_T$, while the $z$ and $j_T$ dependences are shown integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represent the systematic uncertainties.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$, hadron-$z$, and hadron-$j_{T}$ for charged kaons (upper panels) and protons (lower panels) inside jets. In both cases, the $p_T$ dependence is shown integrated over the full ranges of $z$ and $j_T$, while the $z$ and $j_T$ dependences are shown integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represent the systematic uncertainties.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$, hadron-$z$, and hadron-$j_{T}$ for charged kaons (upper panels) and protons (lower panels) inside jets. In both cases, the $p_T$ dependence is shown integrated over the full ranges of $z$ and $j_T$, while the $z$ and $j_T$ dependences are shown integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represent the systematic uncertainties.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$, hadron-$z$, and hadron-$j_{T}$ for charged kaons (upper panels) and protons (lower panels) inside jets. In both cases, the $p_T$ dependence is shown integrated over the full ranges of $z$ and $j_T$, while the $z$ and $j_T$ dependences are shown integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represent the systematic uncertainties.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$, hadron-$z$, and hadron-$j_{T}$ for charged kaons (upper panels) and protons (lower panels) inside jets. In both cases, the $p_T$ dependence is shown integrated over the full ranges of $z$ and $j_T$, while the $z$ and $j_T$ dependences are shown integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represent the systematic uncertainties.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$, hadron-$z$, and hadron-$j_{T}$ for charged kaons (upper panels) and protons (lower panels) inside jets. In both cases, the $p_T$ dependence is shown integrated over the full ranges of $z$ and $j_T$, while the $z$ and $j_T$ dependences are shown integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represent the systematic uncertainties.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of particle jet-$p_{T}$, hadron-$z$, and hadron-$j_{T}$ for charged kaons (upper panels) and protons (lower panels) inside jets. In both cases, the $p_T$ dependence is shown integrated over the full ranges of $z$ and $j_T$, while the $z$ and $j_T$ dependences are shown integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represent the systematic uncertainties.

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's longitudinal momentum fraction, $z$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$z$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different jet-$p_{T}$ bins. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins, integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins, integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins, integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins, integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins, integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins, integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins, integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

Collins asymmetries, $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$, as a function of the charged pion's momentum transverse to the jet axis, $j_{T}$, in different hadron longitudinal momentum fraction $z$ bins, integrated over detector jet-$p_T > 9.9$ GeV/$c$. The bars show the statistical uncertainties, while the size of the boxes represents the systematic uncertainties on $A_{UT}^{\sin(\phi_{S}-\phi_{H})}$ (vertical) and hadron-$j_{T}$ (horizontal).

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $K_{S}^{0}$ (Centrality:0-80%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $K_{S}^{0}$ (Centrality:0-10%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $K_{S}^{0}$ (Centrality:10-40%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $K_{S}^{0}$ (Centrality:40-80%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $K_{S}^{0}$ (Centrality:0-80%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\Lambda$ (Centrality:0-10%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\Lambda$ (Centrality:10-40%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\Lambda$ (Centrality:40-80%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\Lambda$ (Centrality:0-80%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\Lambda$ (Centrality:0-10%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\Lambda$ (Centrality:10-40%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\Lambda$ (Centrality:40-80%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\Lambda$ (Centrality:0-80%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ (Centrality:0-10%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ (Centrality:10-40%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ (Centrality:40-80%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ (Centrality:0-80%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ (Centrality:0-10%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ (Centrality:10-40%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ (Centrality:40-80%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ (Centrality:0-80%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\phi$ (Centrality:0-10%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\phi$ (Centrality:10-40%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\phi$ (Centrality:40-80%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\phi$ (Centrality:0-80%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\phi$ (Centrality:0-10%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\phi$ (Centrality:10-40%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\phi$ (Centrality:0-80%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\Xi^{-}$ (Centrality:0-10%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\Xi^{-}$ (Centrality:10-40%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\Xi^{-}$ (Centrality:40-80%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\Xi^{-}$ (Centrality:0-80%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\Xi^{-}$ (Centrality:0-10%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\Xi^{-}$ (Centrality:10-40%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\Xi^{-}$ (Centrality:0-80%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Xi^{+}}$ (Centrality:0-10%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Xi^{+}}$ (Centrality:10-40%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Xi^{+}}$ (Centrality:40-80%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Xi^{+}}$ (Centrality:0-80%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Xi^{+}}$ (Centrality:0-10%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Xi^{+}}$ (Centrality:10-40%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Xi^{+}}$ (Centrality:0-80%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\Omega^{-}$ (Centrality:0-10%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\Omega^{-}$ (Centrality:10-40%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\Omega^{-}$ (Centrality:40-80%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\Omega^{-}$ (Centrality:0-80%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\Omega^{-}$ (Centrality:0-10%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\Omega^{-}$ (Centrality:10-40%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\Omega^{-}$ (Centrality:0-80%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Omega^{+}}$ (Centrality:0-10%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Omega^{+}}$ (Centrality:10-40%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Omega^{+}}$ (Centrality:40-80%)

$v_{2}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Omega^{+}}$ (Centrality:0-80%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Omega^{+}}$ (Centrality:0-10%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Omega^{+}}$ (Centrality:10-40%)

$v_{3}(p_{T})$ for $\bar{\Omega^{+}}$ (Centrality:0-80%)

$v_{2}$ of $\phi$ to $\bar{p}$ ratio

Difference of $v_{2}$ between particle and anti-particle

Difference of $v_{3}$ between particle and anti-particle

Example of combinatorial background subtracted invariant mass distributions and the extracted yields as a function of $\cos \theta^*$ for $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$ mesons. \textbf{a)} example of $\phi \rightarrow K^+ + K^-$ invariant mass distributions, with combinatorial background subtracted, integrated over $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{b)} example of $K^{*0} (\overline{K^{*0}}) \rightarrow K^{-} \pi^{+} (K^{+} \pi^{-})$ invariant mass distributions, with combinatorial background subtracted, integrated over $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{c)} extracted yields of $\phi$ as a function of $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{d)} extracted yields of $K^{*0}$ as a function of $\cos \theta^*$.

Example of combinatorial background subtracted invariant mass distributions and the extracted yields as a function of $\cos \theta^*$ for $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$ mesons. \textbf{a)} example of $\phi \rightarrow K^+ + K^-$ invariant mass distributions, with combinatorial background subtracted, integrated over $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{b)} example of $K^{*0} (\overline{K^{*0}}) \rightarrow K^{-} \pi^{+} (K^{+} \pi^{-})$ invariant mass distributions, with combinatorial background subtracted, integrated over $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{c)} extracted yields of $\phi$ as a function of $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{d)} extracted yields of $K^{*0}$ as a function of $\cos \theta^*$.

Example of combinatorial background subtracted invariant mass distributions and the extracted yields as a function of $\cos \theta^*$ for $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$ mesons. \textbf{a)} example of $\phi \rightarrow K^+ + K^-$ invariant mass distributions, with combinatorial background subtracted, integrated over $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{b)} example of $K^{*0} (\overline{K^{*0}}) \rightarrow K^{-} \pi^{+} (K^{+} \pi^{-})$ invariant mass distributions, with combinatorial background subtracted, integrated over $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{c)} extracted yields of $\phi$ as a function of $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{d)} extracted yields of $K^{*0}$ as a function of $\cos \theta^*$.

Efficiency corrected $\phi$-meson yields as a function of cos$\theta$* and corresponding fits with Eq.1 in the method section.

Efficiency and acceptance corrected $K^{*0}$-meson yields as a function of cos$\theta$* and corresponding fits with Eq.4 in the method section.

$\phi$-meson $\rho_{00}$ obtained from 1st- and 2nd-order event planes. The red stars (gray squares) show the $\phi$-meson $\rho_{00}$ as a function of beam energy, obtained with the 2nd-order (1st-order) EP.

$\phi$-meson $\rho_{00}$ with respect to different quantization axes. $\phi$-meson $\rho_{00}$ as a function of beam energy, for the out-of-plane direction (stars) and the in-plane direction (diamonds). Curves are fits based on theoretical calculations with a $\phi$-meson field. The corresponding $G_s^{(y)}$ values obtained from the fits are shown in the legend.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $K^{*0}$ for different collision energies.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $K^{*0}$ for different collision energies.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $K^{*0}$ for different collision energies.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $K^{*0}$ for different collision energies.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $K^{*0}$ for different collision energies.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $K^{*0}$ for different collision energies.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $K^{*0}$ for different collision energies.

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of centrality for $\phi$ (upper panels) and $K^{*0}$ (lower panels). The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for the $K^{*0}$ meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.}

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of centrality for $\phi$ (upper panels) and $K^{*0}$ (lower panels). The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for the $K^{*0}$ meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.}

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of centrality for $\phi$ (upper panels) and $K^{*0}$ (lower panels). The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for the $K^{*0}$ meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.}

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of centrality for $\phi$ (upper panels) and $K^{*0}$ (lower panels). The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for the $K^{*0}$ meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.}

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of centrality for $\phi$ (upper panels) and $K^{*0}$ (lower panels). The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for the $K^{*0}$ meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.}

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of centrality for $\phi$ (upper panels) and $K^{*0}$ (lower panels). The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for the $K^{*0}$ meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.}

$\rho_{00}$ as a function of centrality for $\phi$ (upper panels) and $K^{*0}$ (lower panels). The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for the $K^{*0}$ meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.}

Global spin alignment measurement of $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$ vector mesons in Au+Au collisions at 0-20\% centrality. The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for $K^{*0}$-meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.

Global spin alignment measurement of $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$ vector mesons in Au+Au collisions at 0-20\% centrality. The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for $K^{*0}$-meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.

Two-dimensional $\rho^0$ momentum distribution from U+U collisions.

The $P_T^2 \approx |t|$ distribution of $\rho^0$ collected from Au+Au collisions.

The $P_T^2 \approx |t|$ distribution of $\rho^0$ collected from U+U collisions.

The $P_T^2 \approx |t|$ distribution of $\rho^0$ with $|\phi| < \pi/24$ collected from Au+Au collisions.

The $P_T^2 \approx |t|$ distribution of $\rho^0$ with $|\phi - \pi/2| < \pi/24$ collected from Au+Au collisions.

The $\phi$ distribution for $\pi^+\pi^-$ pairs with a pair transverse momentum less than 60 MeV and and an invariant mass between 650 and 900 MeV

The $\phi$ distribution for $\pi^+\pi^-$ pairs with a pair transverse momentum less than 60 MeV and and an invariant mass between 650 and 900 MeV

The $2 \langle \cos{2 \phi} \rangle$ distribution vs. pair transverse momentum for $\pi^+\pi^-$ pairs with an invariant mass between 650 and 900 MeV.

The $2 \langle \cos{2\phi} \rangle$ distribution vs. pair transverse momentum for $\pi^+\pi^-$ pairs with an invariant mass between 650 and 900 MeV.

The $2 \langle \cos{2\phi} \rangle$ distribution vs. pair transverse momentum for $\pi^+\pi^-$ pairs with an invariant mass between 650 and 900 MeV from Au+Au collisions.

The distribution of extracted radii R vs. $\phi$ from Au+Au and U+U.

The correlation functions (corrected for nonuniform detector efficiency in $\phi$; not corrected for the absolute detection efficiency) vs. azimuthal angle difference between forward ($2.6<\eta<4.0$) $\pi^{0}$s in $p$+$p$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{_{NN}}}}=200$ GeV at high $p_{T}$ ($p^{trig}_{T}$=2.5-3 GeV/c, $p^{asso}_{T}$=2-2.5 GeV/c)

The correlation functions (corrected for nonuniform detector efficiency in $\phi$; not corrected for the absolute detection efficiency) vs. azimuthal angle difference between forward ($2.6<\eta<4.0$) $\pi^{0}$s in $p$+Al collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{_{NN}}}}=200$ GeV at high $p_{T}$ ($p^{trig}_{T}$=2.5-3 GeV/c, $p^{asso}_{T}$=2-2.5 GeV/c)

The correlation functions (corrected for nonuniform detector efficiency in $\phi$; not corrected for the absolute detection efficiency) vs. azimuthal angle difference between forward ($2.6<\eta<4.0$) $\pi^{0}$s in $p$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{_{NN}}}}=200$ GeV at high $p_{T}$ ($p^{trig}_{T}$=2.5-3 GeV/c, $p^{asso}_{T}$=2-2.5 GeV/c)

Relative area of MinBias $pAu/pp$ of back-to-back di-$\pi^0$ correlations at forward pseudorapidities ($2.6<\eta<4.0$) from data

Relative area of MinBias $pAl/pp$ of back-to-back di-$\pi^0$ correlations at forward pseudorapidities ($2.6<\eta<4.0$) from data

Relative area of $pAu/pp$ at b=0 of back-to-back di-$\pi^0$ correlations at forward pseudorapidities ($2.6<\eta<4.0$) from prediction

Relative width of MinBias $pAu/pp$ of back-to-back di-$\pi^0$ correlations at forward pseudorapidities ($2.6<\eta<4.0$) from data

Relative width of MinBias $pAl/pp$ of back-to-back di-$\pi^0$ correlations at forward pseudorapidities ($2.6<\eta<4.0$) from data

Relative pedestal of MinBias $pAu/pp$ of back-to-back di-$\pi^0$ correlations at forward pseudorapidities ($2.6<\eta<4.0$) from data

Relative pedestal of MinBias $pAl/pp$ of back-to-back di-$\pi^0$ correlations at forward pseudorapidities ($2.6<\eta<4.0$) from data

Relative area of MinBias $pp/pp$ of back-to-back di-$\pi^0$ correlations at forward pseudorapidities ($2.6<\eta<4.0$), the ratio is unity, error is zero

Relative area of MinBias $pA/pp$ of back-to-back di-$\pi^0$ correlations at forward pseudorapidities ($2.6<\eta<4.0$) from data

Parton dijet $M_{inv}$ vs $A_{LL}$ values with associated uncertainties, for topology C.

Parton dijet $M_{inv}$ vs $A_{LL}$ values with associated uncertainties, for topology D.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (statistical and systematics) for the inclusive jet measurements.The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (statistical and systematics) for the inclusive jet measurements coupling with the forward-forward dijet measurements (topology A). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (statistical and systematics) for the inclusive jet measurements coupling with the forward-forward dijet measurements (topology B). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (statistical and systematics) for the inclusive jet measurements coupling with the forward-forward dijet measurements (topology C). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (statistical and systematics) for the inclusive jet measurements coupling with the forward-forward dijet measurements (topology D). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) for forward-forward dijet measurements (topology A). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) coupling forward-forward dijet measurements (topology A) with forward-central dijet measurements (topology B). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) coupling forward-forward dijet measurements (topology A) with forward-central dijet measurements (topology C). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) coupling forward-forward dijet measurements (topology A) with forward-central dijet measurements (topology D). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) for forward-forward dijet measurements (topology B). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) coupling forward-forward dijet measurements (topology B) with forward-central dijet measurements (topology C). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) coupling forward-forward dijet measurements (topology B) with forward-central dijet measurements (topology D). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) for forward-forward dijet measurements (topology C). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) coupling forward-forward dijet measurements (topology C) with forward-central dijet measurements (topology D). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) for forward-forward dijet measurements (topology D). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

(a) The HFE (electrons from semileptonic decays of heavy-flavor hadrons) cross section at STAR in $p$+$p$ collisions at $\sqrt{s}=200$ GeV from $2012$ (filled circles) and the FONLL calculations (curves). (b) Ratio of data over FONLL calculations. The vertical bars and the boxes represent statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively.

$z_{g}$ for Matched Trigger jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{g}$ for HardCore Recoil jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{g}$ for HardCore Recoil jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{g}$ for Matched Recoil jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{g}$ for Matched Recoil jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$R_{g}$ for HardCore Trigger jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$R_{g}$ for HardCore Trigger jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$R_{g}$ for Matched Trigger jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$R_{g}$ for Matched Trigger jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$R_{g}$ for HardCore Recoil jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$R_{g}$ for HardCore Recoil jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$R_{g}$ for Matched Recoil jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$R_{g}$ for Matched Recoil jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

Fully corrected two subjet $z_{sj}$ for $15 < p_{\rm{T, jet}} < 20$ GeV/c, R$=$0.4 anti-kT and R$=$0.1 subjets

Fully corrected two subjet $z_{sj}$ for $20 < p_{\rm{T, jet}} < 25$ GeV/c, R$=$0.4 anti-kT and R$=$0.1 subjets

Fully corrected two subjet $z_{sj}$ for $25 < p_{\rm{T, jet}} < 30$ GeV/c, R$=$0.4 anti-kT and R$=$0.1 subjets

Fully corrected two subjet $z_{sj}$ for $30 < p_{\rm{T, jet}} < 40$ GeV/c, R$=$0.4 anti-kT and R$=$0.1 subjets

Fully corrected two subjet $\theta_{sj}$ for $15 < p_{\rm{T, jet}} < 20$ GeV/c, R$=$0.4 anti-kT and R$=$0.1 subjets

Fully corrected two subjet $\theta_{sj}$ for $20 < p_{\rm{T, jet}} < 25$ GeV/c, R$=$0.4 anti-kT and R$=$0.1 subjets

Fully corrected two subjet $\theta_{sj}$ for $25 < p_{\rm{T, jet}} < 30$ GeV/c, R$=$0.4 anti-kT and R$=$0.1 subjets

Fully corrected two subjet $\theta_{sj}$ for $30 < p_{\rm{T, jet}} < 40$ GeV/c, R$=$0.4 anti-kT and R$=$0.1 subjets

$z_{sj}$ for HardCore Trigger jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{sj}$ for HardCore Trigger jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{sj}$ for Matched Trigger jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{sj}$ for Matched Trigger jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{sj}$ for HardCore Recoil jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{sj}$ for HardCore Recoil jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{sj}$ for Matched Recoil jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$z_{sj}$ for Matched Recoil jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$\theta_{sj}$ for HardCore Trigger jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$\theta_{sj}$ for HardCore Trigger jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$\theta_{sj}$ for Matched Trigger jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$\theta_{sj}$ for Matched Trigger jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$\theta_{sj}$ for HardCore Recoil jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$\theta_{sj}$ for HardCore Recoil jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$\theta_{sj}$ for Matched Recoil jets in AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$\theta_{sj}$ for Matched Recoil jets in pp$+$AuAu Data anti-kT R$=$0.4

$A_{J}$ for HardCore R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $\theta_{sj} > 0.1$ in Au$+$Au collisions

$A_{J}$ for HardCore R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $\theta_{sj} > 0.1$ in pp$+$AuAu reference

$A_{J}$ for HardCore R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $0.1 < \theta_{sj} < 0.2$ in Au$+$Au collisions

$A_{J}$ for HardCore R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $0.1 < \theta_{sj} < 0.2$ in pp$+$AuAu reference

$A_{J}$ for HardCore R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $0.2 < \theta_{sj} < 0.3$ in Au$+$Au collisions

$A_{J}$ for HardCore R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $0.2 < \theta_{sj} < 0.3$ in pp$+$AuAu reference

$A_{J}$ for Matched R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $\theta_{sj} > 0.1$ in Au$+$Au collisions

$A_{J}$ for Matched R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $\theta_{sj} > 0.1$ in pp$+$AuAu reference

$A_{J}$ for Matched R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $0.1 < \theta_{sj} < 0.2$ in Au$+$Au collisions

$A_{J}$ for Matched R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $0.1 < \theta_{sj} < 0.2$ in pp$+$AuAu reference

$A_{J}$ for Matched R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $0.2 < \theta_{sj} < 0.3$ in Au$+$Au collisions

$A_{J}$ for Matched R=0.4 anti-kT jets with $0.2 < \theta_{sj} < 0.3$ in pp$+$AuAu reference

tracking efficiency in pp collisions as a function of track momentum

tracking efficiency in AuAu collisions as a function of track momentum

fig2_left_top_isobarpaper_star_blue_case2_ruru_nonzeros.

fig2_left_top_isobarpaper_star_grey_data_ruru_nonzeros.

fig2_left_top_isobarpaper_star_red_case3_ruru_nonzeros.

fig2_right_isobarpaper_star_grey_data_nonzero.

fig2_right_low_isobarpaper_star_red_case3_nonzero.

fig2_right_top_isobarpaper_star_blue_case2_nonzero.

fig3_olow_isobarpaper_star_blue_mean_multiplicity_ratio.

fig3_otop_isobarpaper_star_blue_open_mean_multiplicity_zrzr.

fig3_otop_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_mean_multiplicity_ruru.

fig4_left_low_isobarpaper_star_blue_v2_tpc_ratio. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig4_left_low_isobarpaper_star_green_v2_tpc_eta_gt1_ratio.

fig4_left_low_isobarpaper_star_purple_v2_subEv_ratio.

fig4_left_low_isobarpaper_star_red_v2_epd_ratio. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig4_left_low_isobarpaper_star_yellow_v2_EP_ratio.

fig4_left_top_isobarpaper_star_blue_open_v2_2_zrzr.

fig4_left_top_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_v2_2_ruru.

fig4_left_top_isobarpaper_star_green_open_v2_tpc_eta_gt1_zrzr.

fig4_left_top_isobarpaper_star_green_solid_v2_tpc_eta_gt1_ruru.

fig4_left_top_isobarpaper_star_purple_open_v2_subEv_zrzr.

fig4_left_top_isobarpaper_star_purple_solid_v2_subEv_ruru.

fig4_left_top_isobarpaper_star_red_open_v2_tpcepd_zrzr.

fig4_left_top_isobarpaper_star_red_solid_v2_tpcepd_ruru.

fig4_left_top_isobarpaper_star_yellow_open_v2_EP_zrzr.

fig4_left_top_isobarpaper_star_yellow_solid_v2_EP_ruru.

fig4_right_low_isobarpaper_star_green_v2_4_ratio. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig4_right_low_isobarpaper_star_green_v2_zdc_ratio. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig4_right_top_isobarpaper_star_green_open_v2_4_zrzr. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values". "Imaginary number of v_2{4} is presented as negative value”

fig4_right_top_isobarpaper_star_green_solid_v2_4_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values". "Imaginary number of v_2{4} is presented as negative value”

fig4_right_top_isobarpaper_star_grey_open_v2_zdc_zrzr.

fig4_right_top_isobarpaper_star_grey_solid_v2_zdc_ruru.

fig5_olow_isobarpaper_star_green_group-2. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig5_olow_isobarpaper_star_purple_group-4.

fig5_olow_isobarpaper_star_yellow_group-3. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig5_otop_isobarpaper_star_blue_group-1. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig5_otop_isobarpaper_star_green_group-2.

fig5_otop_isobarpaper_star_red_group-3. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig6_olow_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_v2_ratio.

fig6_otop_isobarpaper_star_blue_open_v2_zrzr.

fig6_otop_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_v2_ruru.

fig7_otop_isobarpaper_star_blue_open_Ddelta_zrzr.

fig7_otop_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_Ddelta_ratio.

fig7_otop_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_Ddelta_ruru.

fig8_olow_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_Dgamma_ratio. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig8_otop_isobarpaper_star_blue_open_Dgamma_zrzr.

fig8_otop_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_Dgamma_ruru.

fig9_olow_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_kappa_ratio. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig9_otop_isobarpaper_star_blue_open_kappa_zrzr. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig9_otop_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_kappa_ruru.

fig10_left_low_isobarpaper_star_blue_v2_tpc_ratio. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig10_left_low_isobarpaper_star_green_v3_tpc_ratio. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig10_left_low_isobarpaper_star_red_v2_epd_ratio. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig10_left_low_isobarpaper_star_yellow_v3_epd_ratio. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig10_left_mid_isobarpaper_star_green_open_v3_tpc_zrzr. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig10_left_mid_isobarpaper_star_green_solid_v3_tpc_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig10_left_mid_isobarpaper_star_yellow_open_v3_epd_zrzr.

fig10_left_mid_isobarpaper_star_yellow_solid_v3_epd_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig10_left_top_isobarpaper_star_blue_open_v2_tpc_zrzr.

fig10_left_top_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_v2_tpc_ruru.

fig10_left_top_isobarpaper_star_red_open_v2_epd_zrzr.

fig10_left_top_isobarpaper_star_red_solid_v2_epd_ruru.

fig10_right_low_isobarpaper_star_blue_v3_subEv_ratio. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig10_right_low_isobarpaper_star_green_v3_tpc_ratio. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig10_right_low_isobarpaper_star_purple_v3_tpc_eta_gt1_ratio. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig10_right_low_isobarpaper_star_yellow_v3_epd_ratio. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig10_right_top_isobarpaper_star_blue_open_v3_subEv_zrzr.

fig10_right_top_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_v3_subEv_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig10_right_top_isobarpaper_star_green_open_v3_tpc_zrzr. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig10_right_top_isobarpaper_star_green_solid_v3_tpc_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig10_right_top_isobarpaper_star_purple_open_v3_tpc_eta_gt1_zrzr.

fig10_right_top_isobarpaper_star_purple_solid_v3_tpc_eta_gt1_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig10_right_top_isobarpaper_star_yellow_open_v3_epd_zrzr.

fig10_right_top_isobarpaper_star_yellow_solid_v3_epd_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig11_low_isobarpaper_star_black_g2_tpc_ratio.

fig11_low_isobarpaper_star_blue_g3_tpc_ratio.

fig11_low_isobarpaper_star_red_Ddelta_ratio.

fig11_mid_isobarpaper_star_blue_open_g3_tpc_zrzr. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig11_mid_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_g3_tpc_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig11_top_isobarpaper_star_black_open_g2_tpc_zrzr. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig11_top_isobarpaper_star_black_solid_g2_tpc_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig12_low_isobarpaper_star_black_g2_subEv_ratio. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig12_low_isobarpaper_star_blue_g3_subEv_ratio.

fig12_low_isobarpaper_star_red_Ddelta_ratio.

fig12_mid_isobarpaper_star_blue_open_g3_subEv_zrzr. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig12_mid_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_g3_subEv_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig12_top_isobarpaper_star_black_open_g2_subEv_zrzr.

fig12_top_isobarpaper_star_black_solid_g2_subEv_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig13_low_isobarpaper_star_black_g2_epd_ratio.

fig13_low_isobarpaper_star_blue_g3_epd_ratio.

fig13_low_isobarpaper_star_red_Ddelta_ratio.

fig13_mid_isobarpaper_star_blue_open_g3_epd_zrzr. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig13_mid_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_g3_epd_ruru.

fig13_top_isobarpaper_star_black_open_g2_epd_zrzr. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig13_top_isobarpaper_star_black_solid_g2_epd_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig14_low_isobarpaper_star_black_solid_k2_ratio.

fig14_low_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_k3_ratio.

fig14_mid_isobarpaper_star_blue_open_k3_zrzr. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig14_mid_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_k3_ruru.

fig14_top_isobarpaper_star_black_open_k2_zrzr.

fig14_top_isobarpaper_star_black_solid_k2_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_left_lowerleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_circle_tpc_ss_zrzr_40-50. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_left_lowerleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_square_tpc_os_zrzr_40-50.

fig15_left_lowerleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_circle_tpc_ss_ruru_40-50. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_left_lowerleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_square_tpc_os_ruru_40-50.

fig15_left_lowerrightpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_circle_epd_ss_zrzr_40-50. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_left_lowerrightpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_square_epd_os_zrzr_40-50. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_left_lowerrightpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_circle_epd_ss_ruru_40-50. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_left_lowerrightpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_square_epd_os_ruru_40-50. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_left_midleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_circle_tpc_ss_zrzr_30-40.

fig15_left_midleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_square_tpc_os_zrzr_30-40.

fig15_left_midleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_circle_tpc_ss_ruru_30-40. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_left_midleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_square_tpc_os_ruru_30-40. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_left_midrightpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_circle_epd_ss_zrzr_30-40. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_left_midrightpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_square_epd_os_zrzr_30-40. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_left_midrightpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_circle_epd_ss_ruru_30-40. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_left_midrightpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_square_epd_os_ruru_30-40. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_left_topleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_circle_tpc_ss_zrzr_20-30.

fig15_left_topleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_square_tpc_os_zrzr_20-30.

fig15_left_topleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_circle_tpc_ss_ruru_20-30.

fig15_left_topleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_square_tpc_os_ruru_20-30.

fig15_left_toprightpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_circle_epd_ss_zrzr_20-30. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_left_toprightpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_square_epd_os_zrzr_20-30. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_left_toprightpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_circle_epd_ss_ruru_20-30.

fig15_left_toprightpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_square_epd_os_ruru_20-30.

fig15_right_lowerleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_circle_tpc_Deltagamma_zrzr_40-50. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_right_lowerleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_circle_tpc_Deltagamma_ruru_40-50. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_right_lowerrightpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_circle_epd_Deltagamma_zrzr_40-50. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_right_lowerrightpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_circle_epd_Deltagamma_ruru_40-50.

fig15_right_midleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_circle_tpc_Deltagamma_zrzr_30-40. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_right_midleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_circle_tpc_Deltagamma_ruru_30-40.

fig15_right_midrightpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_circle_epd_Deltagamma_zrzr_30-40. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_right_midrightpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_circle_epd_Deltagamma_ruru_30-40.

fig15_right_topleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_circle_tpc_Deltagamma_zrzr_20-30.

fig15_right_topleftpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_circle_tpc_Deltagamma_ruru_20-30.

fig15_right_toprightpanel_isobarpaper_star_blue_circle_epd_Deltagamma_zrzr_20-30. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig15_right_toprightpanel_isobarpaper_star_red_circle_epd_Deltagamma_ruru_20-30. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig16_a_blue_zrzr.

fig16_a_red_ruru.

fig16_b.

fig17_a_blue_zrzr. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig17_a_red_ruru.

fig17_b. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig18_a_blue_ruru_ZDCdg.

fig18_a_red_ruru_TPCdg.

fig18_b_blue_ruru_ZDCv2.

fig18_b_red_ruru_TPCv2.

fig18_c_blue_ruru_A. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig18_c_red_ruru_a.

fig18_d_red_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig18_e_blue_zrzr_ZDCdg.

fig18_e_red_zrzr_TPCdg.

fig18_f_blue_zrzr_ZDCv2.

fig18_f_red_zrzr_TPCv2.

fig18_g_blue_zrzr_A. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig18_g_red_zrzr_a. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig18_h_red_zrzr. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig19_a_blue_zrzr. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig19_a_red_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig19_b_blue_zrzr.

fig19_b_red_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig21_doubleratio.

fig22_doubleratio_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig22_doubleratio_zrzr.

fig22_fcme_ruru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig22_fcme_zrzr.

fig23_ratio_v22.

fig23_ratio_v24. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig23_ratio_v2z. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig23_v22_ru.

fig23_v22_zr.

fig23_v24_ru. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values". "Imaginary number of v_2{4} is presented as negative value”

fig23_v24_zr. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values". "Imaginary number of v_2{4} is presented as negative value”

fig23_v2z_ru.

fig23_v2z_zr.

fig24_a_isobarpaper_star_ruru_q2_0-20.

fig24_a_isobarpaper_star_ruru_q2_20-40.

fig24_a_isobarpaper_star_ruru_q2_40-60.

fig24_a_isobarpaper_star_ruru_q2_60-100.

fig24_b_isobarpaper_ruru.

fig24_c_isobarpaper_ruru.

fig24_d_isobarpaper_star_zrzr_q2_0-20.

fig24_d_isobarpaper_star_zrzr_q2_20-40.

fig24_d_isobarpaper_star_zrzr_q2_40-60.

fig24_d_isobarpaper_star_zrzr_q2_60-100.

fig24_e_isobarpaper_zrzr.

fig24_f_isobarpaper_zrzr.

fig25_a_isobarpaper_star_blue_open_zrzr_0-10.

fig25_a_isobarpaper_star_blue_solid_ruru_0-10.

fig25_b_isobarpaper_star_red_open_zrzr_10-30.

fig25_b_isobarpaper_star_red_solid_ruru_10-30.

fig25_c_isobarpaper_star_green_open_zrzr_30-50.

fig25_c_isobarpaper_star_green_solid_ruru_30-50.

fig25_d_isobarpaper_star_orange_open_zrzr_20-50.

fig25_d_isobarpaper_star_orange_solid_ruru_20-50.

fig25_e_isobarpaper_star_open_zrzr.

fig25_e_isobarpaper_star_solid_ruru.

fig25_f_isobarpaper_star_solid_ratio. "For points without systematic uncertainties, using the method for estimating systematic uncertainties as described in the paper yields 0 values"

fig26_isobarpaper_star_black_deltagamma_by_v2_1. "({/Symbol Dg}_{112}/v_{2})_{EP,TPC}" Group-1

fig26_isobarpaper_star_black_deltagamma_by_v2_2. "({/Symbol Dg}_{112}/v_{2})_{3PC,TPC}" Group-2

fig26_isobarpaper_star_black_deltagamma_by_v2_3. "({/Symbol Dg}_{112}/v_{2})_{3PC,TPC}" Group-3

fig26_isobarpaper_star_black_deltagamma_by_v2_4. "({/Symbol Dg}_{112}/v_{2})_{SE,TPC}" Group-2

fig26_isobarpaper_star_black_deltagamma_by_v2_5. "({/Symbol Dg}_{112}/v_{2})_{SE,TPC}" Group-3

fig26_isobarpaper_star_black_deltagamma_by_v2_6. "({/Symbol Dg}_{112}/v_{2})_{SE,TPC}" Group-4

fig26_isobarpaper_star_black_deltagamma_by_v2_7. "({/Symbol Dg}_{112}/v_{2})_{SP,EPD}" Group-2

fig26_isobarpaper_star_blue_R. "{/Symbol s}@^{-1}_{R_{/Symbol Y}_2}" Group-5

fig26_isobarpaper_star_darkgreen_k_9. "{/Symbol k}_{112}" Group-1

fig26_isobarpaper_star_darkgreen_k_10. "k_{2}" Group-2

fig26_isobarpaper_star_grey_deltagamma_by_v3. "({/Symbol Dg}_{123}/v_{3})_{3PC,TPC}" Group-2

fig26_isobarpaper_star_lightgreen_k. "k_{3}" Group-2

fig27_isobarpaper_star_black_deltagamma_by_v2_1. "({/Symbol Dg}_{112}/v_{2})_{EP,TPC}" Group-1

fig27_isobarpaper_star_black_deltagamma_by_v2_2. "({/Symbol Dg}_{112}/v_{2})_{3PC,TPC}" Group-2

fig27_isobarpaper_star_black_deltagamma_by_v2_3. "({/Symbol Dg}_{112}/v_{2})_{3PC,TPC}" Group-3

fig27_isobarpaper_star_black_deltagamma_by_v2_4. "({/Symbol Dg}_{112}/v_{2})_{SE,TPC}" Group-2

fig27_isobarpaper_star_black_deltagamma_by_v2_5. "({/Symbol Dg}_{112}/v_{2})_{SE,TPC}" Group-3

fig27_isobarpaper_star_black_deltagamma_by_v2_6. "({/Symbol Dg}_{112}/v_{2})_{SE,TPC}" Group-4

fig27_isobarpaper_star_black_deltagamma_by_v2_7. "({/Symbol Dg}_{112}/v_{2})_{SP,EPD}" Group-2

fig27_isobarpaper_star_blue_R.txt. "{/Symbol s}@^{-1}_{R_{/Symbol Y}_2}" Group-5

fig27_isobarpaper_star_darkgreen_k_9. "{/Symbol k}_{112}" Group-1

fig27_isobarpaper_star_darkgreen_k_10. "k_{2}" Group-2

fig27_isobarpaper_star_grey_deltagamma_by_v3. "({/Symbol Dg}_{123}/v_{3})_{3PC,TPC}" Group-2

fig27_isobarpaper_star_lightgreen_k. "k_{3}" Group-2

fig27_isobarpaper_star_purple_r_n_13. "r(m_{inv})" Group-3

fig27_isobarpaper_star_purple_r_n_14. "1/N@_{trk}^{offline}"

$K^-$ (a), invariant yields as a function of $m_T-m_0$ for various rapidity regions in 10--40\% central Au+Au collisions at ${\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = \mathrm{3\,GeV}}$. Statistics and systematic uncertainties are added quadratic here for plotting. Solid and dashed black lines depict $m_T$ exponential function fits to the measured data points with arbitrate scaling factors in each rapidity windows.

$\phi$ meson (b) invariant yields as a function of $m_T-m_0$ for various rapidity regions in 10--40\% central Au+Au collisions at ${\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = \mathrm{3\,GeV}}$. Statistics and systematic uncertainties are added quadratic here for plotting. Solid and dashed black lines depict $m_T$ exponential function fits to the measured data points with arbitrate scaling factors in each rapidity windows.

$\Xi^-$ (c) invariant yields as a function of $m_T-m_0$ for various rapidity regions in 10--40\% central Au+Au collisions at ${\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = \mathrm{3\,GeV}}$. Statistics and systematic uncertainties are added quadratic here for plotting. Solid and dashed black lines depict $m_T$ exponential function fits to the measured data points with arbitrate scaling factors in each rapidity windows.

$K^-$ (a), invariant yields as a function of $m_T-m_0$ for various rapidity regions in 40--60\% central Au+Au collisions at ${\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = \mathrm{3\,GeV}}$. Statistics and systematic uncertainties are added quadratic here for plotting. Solid and dashed black lines depict $m_T$ exponential function fits to the measured data points with arbitrate scaling factors in each rapidity windows.

$\phi$ meson (b) invariant yields as a function of $m_T-m_0$ for various rapidity regions in 40--60\% central Au+Au collisions at ${\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = \mathrm{3\,GeV}}$. Statistics and systematic uncertainties are added quadratic here for plotting. Solid and dashed black lines depict $m_T$ exponential function fits to the measured data points with arbitrate scaling factors in each rapidity windows.

Rapidity density distributions of $K^-$ (squares), $p_T$-integrated yields $dN/dy$ in 0--10\% (a), 10--40\% (b) and 40--60\% central (c) Au+Au collisions at ${\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = \mathrm{3\,GeV}}$. %The full symbols show the measured data, while the open ones are data reflected with respect to $y=0$ in the center-of-mass frame. Solid lines depict Gaussian function fits to the data points.

Rapidity density distributions of $\phi$ meson (circles) $p_T$-integrated yields $dN/dy$ in 0--10\% (a), 10--40\% (b) and 40--60\% central (c) Au+Au collisions at ${\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = \mathrm{3\,GeV}}$. %The full symbols show the measured data, while the open ones are data reflected with respect to $y=0$ in the center-of-mass frame. Solid lines depict Gaussian function fits to the data points.

Rapidity density distributions of $\Xi^-$ (diamonds) $p_T$-integrated yields $dN/dy$ in 0--10\% (a), 10--40\% (b) and 40--60\% central (c) Au+Au collisions at ${\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = \mathrm{3\,GeV}}$. %The full symbols show the measured data, while the open ones are data reflected with respect to $y=0$ in the center-of-mass frame. Solid lines depict Gaussian function fits to the data points.

$\phi/K^-$ (a) and $\phi/\Xi^-$ (b) ratio as a function of collision energy, $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$. The solid black circles show the measurements presented here in 0-10\% centrality bin, while empty markers in black or grey are used for data from various other energies and/or collision systems. The grey solid line represents a THERMUS calculation based on the Grand Canonical Ensemble (GCE) while the dotted lines depict calculations based on the Canonical Ensemble (CE) with different parameters of strangeness correlation radius ($r_c$). The green dashed line, green shaded band and the solid red line show transport model calculations from the public versions $\mathrm{UrQMD}^{1}$, modified $\mathrm{UrQMD}^{2}$ and SMASH, respectively.

Rapidity($y$) dependence of $v_1$ (top panels) and $v_2$ (bottom panels) of proton and $\Lambda$ baryons (left panels), pions (middle panels) and kaons (right panels) in 10-40% centrality for the $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3GeV Au+Au collisions. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points. The UrQMD and JAM results are shown as bands:golden, red and blue bands stand for JAM mean-field, UrQMD mean-field and UrQMD cascade mode, respectively. The value of the incompressibility $\kappa$ = 380 MeV is used in the mean-field option. More detailed model descriptions and data comparisons can be found in Supplemental Material.

Rapidity($y$) dependence of $v_1$ (top panels) and $v_2$ (bottom panels) of proton and $\Lambda$ baryons (left panels), pions (middle panels) and kaons (right panels) in 10-40% centrality for the $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3GeV Au+Au collisions. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points. The UrQMD and JAM results are shown as bands:golden, red and blue bands stand for JAM mean-field, UrQMD mean-field and UrQMD cascade mode, respectively. The value of the incompressibility $\kappa$ = 380 MeV is used in the mean-field option. More detailed model descriptions and data comparisons can be found in Supplemental Material.

Rapidity($y$) dependence of $v_1$ (top panels) and $v_2$ (bottom panels) of proton and $\Lambda$ baryons (left panels), pions (middle panels) and kaons (right panels) in 10-40% centrality for the $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3GeV Au+Au collisions. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points. The UrQMD and JAM results are shown as bands:golden, red and blue bands stand for JAM mean-field, UrQMD mean-field and UrQMD cascade mode, respectively. The value of the incompressibility $\kappa$ = 380 MeV is used in the mean-field option. More detailed model descriptions and data comparisons can be found in Supplemental Material.

$v_2$ scaled by the number of constituent quarks, $v_2/n_q$ , as a function of scaled transverse kinetic energy ($(m_T − m_0)/n_q$) for pions, kaons and protons from Au+Au collisions in 10-40% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3, 27, and 54.4 GeV for positive charged particles (left panel) and negative charged particles (right panel). Colored dashed lines represent the scaling fit to data in 7.7, 14.5, 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au+Au collisions from STAR experiment at RHIC [43–45]. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points.

$v_2$ scaled by the number of constituent quarks, $v_2/n_q$ , as a function of scaled transverse kinetic energy ($(m_T − m_0)/n_q$) for pions, kaons and protons from Au+Au collisions in 10-40% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3, 27, and 54.4 GeV for positive charged particles (left panel) and negative charged particles (right panel). Colored dashed lines represent the scaling fit to data in 7.7, 14.5, 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au+Au collisions from STAR experiment at RHIC [43–45]. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points.

$v_2$ scaled by the number of constituent quarks, $v_2/n_q$ , as a function of scaled transverse kinetic energy ($(m_T − m_0)/n_q$) for pions, kaons and protons from Au+Au collisions in 10-40% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3, 27, and 54.4 GeV for positive charged particles (left panel) and negative charged particles (right panel). Colored dashed lines represent the scaling fit to data in 7.7, 14.5, 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au+Au collisions from STAR experiment at RHIC [43–45]. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points.

$v_2$ scaled by the number of constituent quarks, $v_2/n_q$ , as a function of scaled transverse kinetic energy ($(m_T − m_0)/n_q$) for pions, kaons and protons from Au+Au collisions in 10-40% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3, 27, and 54.4 GeV for positive charged particles (left panel) and negative charged particles (right panel). Colored dashed lines represent the scaling fit to data in 7.7, 14.5, 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au+Au collisions from STAR experiment at RHIC [43–45]. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points.

$v_2$ scaled by the number of constituent quarks, $v_2/n_q$ , as a function of scaled transverse kinetic energy ($(m_T − m_0)/n_q$) for pions, kaons and protons from Au+Au collisions in 10-40% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3, 27, and 54.4 GeV for positive charged particles (left panel) and negative charged particles (right panel). Colored dashed lines represent the scaling fit to data in 7.7, 14.5, 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au+Au collisions from STAR experiment at RHIC [43–45]. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points.

$v_2$ scaled by the number of constituent quarks, $v_2/n_q$ , as a function of scaled transverse kinetic energy ($(m_T − m_0)/n_q$) for pions, kaons and protons from Au+Au collisions in 10-40% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3, 27, and 54.4 GeV for positive charged particles (left panel) and negative charged particles (right panel). Colored dashed lines represent the scaling fit to data in 7.7, 14.5, 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au+Au collisions from STAR experiment at RHIC [43–45]. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points.

$v_2$ scaled by the number of constituent quarks, $v_2/n_q$ , as a function of scaled transverse kinetic energy ($(m_T − m_0)/n_q$) for pions, kaons and protons from Au+Au collisions in 10-40% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3, 27, and 54.4 GeV for positive charged particles (left panel) and negative charged particles (right panel). Colored dashed lines represent the scaling fit to data in 7.7, 14.5, 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au+Au collisions from STAR experiment at RHIC [43–45]. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points.

$v_2$ scaled by the number of constituent quarks, $v_2/n_q$ , as a function of scaled transverse kinetic energy ($(m_T − m_0)/n_q$) for pions, kaons and protons from Au+Au collisions in 10-40% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3, 27, and 54.4 GeV for positive charged particles (left panel) and negative charged particles (right panel). Colored dashed lines represent the scaling fit to data in 7.7, 14.5, 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au+Au collisions from STAR experiment at RHIC [43–45]. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points.

$v_2$ scaled by the number of constituent quarks, $v_2/n_q$ , as a function of scaled transverse kinetic energy ($(m_T − m_0)/n_q$) for pions, kaons and protons from Au+Au collisions in 10-40% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3, 27, and 54.4 GeV for positive charged particles (left panel) and negative charged particles (right panel). Colored dashed lines represent the scaling fit to data in 7.7, 14.5, 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au+Au collisions from STAR experiment at RHIC [43–45]. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points.

$v_2$ scaled by the number of constituent quarks, $v_2/n_q$ , as a function of scaled transverse kinetic energy ($(m_T − m_0)/n_q$) for pions, kaons and protons from Au+Au collisions in 10-40% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3, 27, and 54.4 GeV for positive charged particles (left panel) and negative charged particles (right panel). Colored dashed lines represent the scaling fit to data in 7.7, 14.5, 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au+Au collisions from STAR experiment at RHIC [43–45]. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points.

$v_2$ scaled by the number of constituent quarks, $v_2/n_q$ , as a function of scaled transverse kinetic energy ($(m_T − m_0)/n_q$) for pions, kaons and protons from Au+Au collisions in 10-40% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3, 27, and 54.4 GeV for positive charged particles (left panel) and negative charged particles (right panel). Colored dashed lines represent the scaling fit to data in 7.7, 14.5, 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au+Au collisions from STAR experiment at RHIC [43–45]. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points.

$v_2$ scaled by the number of constituent quarks, $v_2/n_q$ , as a function of scaled transverse kinetic energy ($(m_T − m_0)/n_q$) for pions, kaons and protons from Au+Au collisions in 10-40% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3, 27, and 54.4 GeV for positive charged particles (left panel) and negative charged particles (right panel). Colored dashed lines represent the scaling fit to data in 7.7, 14.5, 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au+Au collisions from STAR experiment at RHIC [43–45]. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points.

$v_2$ scaled by the number of constituent quarks, $v_2/n_q$ , as a function of scaled transverse kinetic energy ($(m_T − m_0)/n_q$) for pions, kaons and protons from Au+Au collisions in 10-40% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3, 27, and 54.4 GeV for positive charged particles (left panel) and negative charged particles (right panel). Colored dashed lines represent the scaling fit to data in 7.7, 14.5, 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au+Au collisions from STAR experiment at RHIC [43–45]. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points.

$v_2$ scaled by the number of constituent quarks, $v_2/n_q$ , as a function of scaled transverse kinetic energy ($(m_T − m_0)/n_q$) for pions, kaons and protons from Au+Au collisions in 10-40% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3, 27, and 54.4 GeV for positive charged particles (left panel) and negative charged particles (right panel). Colored dashed lines represent the scaling fit to data in 7.7, 14.5, 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au+Au collisions from STAR experiment at RHIC [43–45]. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points.

$v_2$ scaled by the number of constituent quarks, $v_2/n_q$ , as a function of scaled transverse kinetic energy ($(m_T − m_0)/n_q$) for pions, kaons and protons from Au+Au collisions in 10-40% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3, 27, and 54.4 GeV for positive charged particles (left panel) and negative charged particles (right panel). Colored dashed lines represent the scaling fit to data in 7.7, 14.5, 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au+Au collisions from STAR experiment at RHIC [43–45]. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points.

$v_2$ scaled by the number of constituent quarks, $v_2/n_q$ , as a function of scaled transverse kinetic energy ($(m_T − m_0)/n_q$) for pions, kaons and protons from Au+Au collisions in 10-40% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3, 27, and 54.4 GeV for positive charged particles (left panel) and negative charged particles (right panel). Colored dashed lines represent the scaling fit to data in 7.7, 14.5, 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au+Au collisions from STAR experiment at RHIC [43–45]. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points.

$v_2$ scaled by the number of constituent quarks, $v_2/n_q$ , as a function of scaled transverse kinetic energy ($(m_T − m_0)/n_q$) for pions, kaons and protons from Au+Au collisions in 10-40% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 3, 27, and 54.4 GeV for positive charged particles (left panel) and negative charged particles (right panel). Colored dashed lines represent the scaling fit to data in 7.7, 14.5, 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au+Au collisions from STAR experiment at RHIC [43–45]. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points.

Collision energy dependence of (top panel) directed flow slope $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ for p, $\Lambda, \pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$), K(combined from $K^{\pm}$ and $K_S^0$), $\phi$ and $\Xi^−$, and (bottom panel) elliptic flow $v_2$ for p, $\pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$) in heavy- ion collisions. Collision centrality for all data from RHIC is 10-40%, except for 4.5 GeV where 10-30% is for $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ and 0-30% is for $v_2$. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points. The JAM and UrQMD results are shown as colored bands:golden, red and blue bands stand for JAM mean-field, UrQMD mean-field and UrQMD cascade mode, respectively. For clarity the x-axis value of the data points have been shifted.

Collision energy dependence of (top panel) directed flow slope $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ for p, $\Lambda, \pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$), K(combined from $K^{\pm}$ and $K_S^0$), $\phi$ and $\Xi^−$, and (bottom panel) elliptic flow $v_2$ for p, $\pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$) in heavy- ion collisions. Collision centrality for all data from RHIC is 10-40%, except for 4.5 GeV where 10-30% is for $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ and 0-30% is for $v_2$. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points. The JAM and UrQMD results are shown as colored bands:golden, red and blue bands stand for JAM mean-field, UrQMD mean-field and UrQMD cascade mode, respectively. For clarity the x-axis value of the data points have been shifted.

Collision energy dependence of (top panel) directed flow slope $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ for p, $\Lambda, \pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$), K(combined from $K^{\pm}$ and $K_S^0$), $\phi$ and $\Xi^−$, and (bottom panel) elliptic flow $v_2$ for p, $\pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$) in heavy- ion collisions. Collision centrality for all data from RHIC is 10-40%, except for 4.5 GeV where 10-30% is for $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ and 0-30% is for $v_2$. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points. The JAM and UrQMD results are shown as colored bands:golden, red and blue bands stand for JAM mean-field, UrQMD mean-field and UrQMD cascade mode, respectively. For clarity the x-axis value of the data points have been shifted.

Collision energy dependence of (top panel) directed flow slope $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ for p, $\Lambda, \pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$), K(combined from $K^{\pm}$ and $K_S^0$), $\phi$ and $\Xi^−$, and (bottom panel) elliptic flow $v_2$ for p, $\pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$) in heavy- ion collisions. Collision centrality for all data from RHIC is 10-40%, except for 4.5 GeV where 10-30% is for $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ and 0-30% is for $v_2$. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points. The JAM and UrQMD results are shown as colored bands:golden, red and blue bands stand for JAM mean-field, UrQMD mean-field and UrQMD cascade mode, respectively. For clarity the x-axis value of the data points have been shifted.

Collision energy dependence of (top panel) directed flow slope $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ for p, $\Lambda, \pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$), K(combined from $K^{\pm}$ and $K_S^0$), $\phi$ and $\Xi^−$, and (bottom panel) elliptic flow $v_2$ for p, $\pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$) in heavy- ion collisions. Collision centrality for all data from RHIC is 10-40%, except for 4.5 GeV where 10-30% is for $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ and 0-30% is for $v_2$. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points. The JAM and UrQMD results are shown as colored bands:golden, red and blue bands stand for JAM mean-field, UrQMD mean-field and UrQMD cascade mode, respectively. For clarity the x-axis value of the data points have been shifted.

Collision energy dependence of (top panel) directed flow slope $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ for p, $\Lambda, \pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$), K(combined from $K^{\pm}$ and $K_S^0$), $\phi$ and $\Xi^−$, and (bottom panel) elliptic flow $v_2$ for p, $\pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$) in heavy- ion collisions. Collision centrality for all data from RHIC is 10-40%, except for 4.5 GeV where 10-30% is for $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ and 0-30% is for $v_2$. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points. The JAM and UrQMD results are shown as colored bands:golden, red and blue bands stand for JAM mean-field, UrQMD mean-field and UrQMD cascade mode, respectively. For clarity the x-axis value of the data points have been shifted.

Collision energy dependence of (top panel) directed flow slope $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ for p, $\Lambda, \pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$), K(combined from $K^{\pm}$ and $K_S^0$), $\phi$ and $\Xi^−$, and (bottom panel) elliptic flow $v_2$ for p, $\pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$) in heavy- ion collisions. Collision centrality for all data from RHIC is 10-40%, except for 4.5 GeV where 10-30% is for $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ and 0-30% is for $v_2$. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points. The JAM and UrQMD results are shown as colored bands:golden, red and blue bands stand for JAM mean-field, UrQMD mean-field and UrQMD cascade mode, respectively. For clarity the x-axis value of the data points have been shifted.

Collision energy dependence of (top panel) directed flow slope $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ for p, $\Lambda, \pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$), K(combined from $K^{\pm}$ and $K_S^0$), $\phi$ and $\Xi^−$, and (bottom panel) elliptic flow $v_2$ for p, $\pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$) in heavy- ion collisions. Collision centrality for all data from RHIC is 10-40%, except for 4.5 GeV where 10-30% is for $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ and 0-30% is for $v_2$. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points. The JAM and UrQMD results are shown as colored bands:golden, red and blue bands stand for JAM mean-field, UrQMD mean-field and UrQMD cascade mode, respectively. For clarity the x-axis value of the data points have been shifted.

Collision energy dependence of (top panel) directed flow slope $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ for p, $\Lambda, \pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$), K(combined from $K^{\pm}$ and $K_S^0$), $\phi$ and $\Xi^−$, and (bottom panel) elliptic flow $v_2$ for p, $\pi$(combined from $\pi^{\pm}$) in heavy- ion collisions. Collision centrality for all data from RHIC is 10-40%, except for 4.5 GeV where 10-30% is for $dv_1/dy|_{y=0}$ and 0-30% is for $v_2$. Statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as bars and gray bands, respectively. Some uncertainties are smaller than the data points. The JAM and UrQMD results are shown as colored bands:golden, red and blue bands stand for JAM mean-field, UrQMD mean-field and UrQMD cascade mode, respectively. For clarity the x-axis value of the data points have been shifted.

The centrality dependencies of the $\Delta\gamma\{\psi_\mathrm{ZDC}\}$ for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The centrality dependencies of the A for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The centrality dependencies of the a for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The centrality dependencies of the A/a using full-event method for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The centrality dependencies of the A/a using sub-event method for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The centrality dependencies of the $f_\mathrm{CME}$ using full-event method for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The centrality dependencies of the $f_\mathrm{CME}$ using sub-event method for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The centrality dependencies of the $\Delta\gamma_\mathrm{CME}$ using full-event method for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The centrality dependencies of the $\Delta\gamma_\mathrm{CME}$ using sub-event method for Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The $f_\mathrm{CME}$ from different methods for 20-50% centrality Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The $f_\mathrm{CME}$ from different methods for 50-80% centrality Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The $\Delta\gamma_\mathrm{CME}$ from different methods for 20-50% centrality Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

The $\Delta\gamma_\mathrm{CME}$ from different methods for 50-80% centrality Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=200 GeV.

Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.

Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.

Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.

Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.

Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.

Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.

Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.

Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.

Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.

Collisions centrality dependence of net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ in Au+Au collisions for |$y$| < 0.5 and 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. A shaded band shows the results from UrQMD model calculations. UrQMD calculations from the above three collision energies are consistent among them so they are merged in order to reduce statistical fluctuations. Details on these calculations can be found in the Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher]. The lattice QCD calculations [16, 17] for T = 160 MeV and $\mu_{B}$ < 110 MeV. are shown as a blue band at $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ $\approx$ 340.

Collisions centrality dependence of net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ in Au+Au collisions for |$y$| < 0.5 and 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. A shaded band shows the results from UrQMD model calculations. UrQMD calculations from the above three collision energies are consistent among them so they are merged in order to reduce statistical fluctuations. Details on these calculations can be found in the Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher]. The lattice QCD calculations [16, 17] for T = 160 MeV and $\mu_{B}$ < 110 MeV. are shown as a blue band at $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ $\approx$ 340.

Collisions centrality dependence of net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ in Au+Au collisions for |$y$| < 0.5 and 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. A shaded band shows the results from UrQMD model calculations. UrQMD calculations from the above three collision energies are consistent among them so they are merged in order to reduce statistical fluctuations. Details on these calculations can be found in the Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher]. The lattice QCD calculations [16, 17] for T = 160 MeV and $\mu_{B}$ < 110 MeV. are shown as a blue band at $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ $\approx$ 340.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.

Cumulants and their ratios up to the sixth order corrected for non-binomial efficiencies for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-5% centrality. The CBWC is applied for 2.5% centrality bin width. Results from the conventional efficiency correction are shown as black filled circles, results from the unfolding with the binomial detector response are shown as black open circles, and results from beta-binomial detector response with $\alpha+\sigma$, $\alpha$ and $\alpha-\sigma$ are shown in green triangles, red squares and blue triangles, respectively. C5, C6, C2/C1, C5/C1 and C6/C2 are scaled by constant shown in each column.

Collision centrality dependence of net-proton C6/C2 in Au+Au collisions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV within |y| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT (GeV/c) < 2.0. Results with and without the CBWC are overlaid. The results are corrected for detector efficiencies. Points for different calculation methods are staggered horizontally to improve clarity.

Collision centrality dependence of net-proton C6/C2 in Au+Au collisions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV within |y| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT (GeV/c) < 2.0. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. Shaded and hatched bands show the results from UrQMD model calculations The lattice QCD calculations [13, 14] for T = 160 MeV and $\mu_{B}$ < 110 MeV. are shown as a blue band at $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ $\approx$ 340.

The uncorrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $20 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 25$ GeV$/c$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $20 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 25$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $20 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 25$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $25 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 30$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $25 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 30$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $20 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 25$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $20 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 25$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $25 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 30$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $25 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 30$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.2$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.2$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.2$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.2$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $30 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 40$ GeV$/c$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The mean of the fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R=0.2$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$.

The mean of the fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R=0.2$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The mean of the fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R=0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$.

The mean of the fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R=0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The mean of the fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R=0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$.

The mean of the fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R=0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The mean of the fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R=0.2$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$.

The mean of the fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R=0.2$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The mean of the fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R=0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$.

The mean of the fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R=0.4$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The mean of the fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R=0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$.

The mean of the fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R=0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets as a function of $p_{\rm{T,jet}}$. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $20 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 25$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference.

The fully corrected jet mass distribution for $R = 0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $20 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 25$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $20 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 25$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference.

The fully corrected SoftDrop groomed jet mass distribution for $R = 0.6$ anti-$k_{\rm{T}}$ jets with $20 < p_{\rm{T,jet}} < 25$ GeV$/c$. Data are reported beyond the x-axis upper limit of the figure, for future reference. Updated to correct a small bug that had shifted the jet mass to slightly smaller values.

Parton inclusive-jet $p_T$ and $A_{LL}$ values with associated uncertainties for jet-$\eta$ region $0.5<|\eta|<1$.

Parton inclusive-jet $p_T$ and $A_{LL}$ values with associated uncertainties for jet-$\eta$ region $|\eta|<0.5$.

Parton dijet invariant mass $M_{inv}$ and $A_{LL}$ values with associated uncertainties for the $\textrm{sign}(\eta_1) = \textrm{sign}(\eta_2)$ topology.

Parton dijet invariant mass $M_{inv}$ and $A_{LL}$ values with associated uncertainties for the $\textrm{sign}(\eta_1) \neq \textrm{sign}(\eta_2)$ topology.

Parton inclusive-jet $p_T$, $x_T$, and $A_{LL}$ values with associated uncertainties for jet-$\eta$ region $|\eta|<1$.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties for inclusive jet measurements with jets in the $0.5<|\eta|<1$ region. The $A_{LL}$ uncertainty contribution of $0.0007$ from uncertainty in the relative luminosity measurement and $6.1\%$ from the beam polarization uncertainty, which are common to all the data points, are separated from the listed values.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties for inclusive jet measurements with jets in the $|\eta|<0.5$ region. The $A_{LL}$ uncertainty contribution of $0.0007$ from uncertainty in the relative luminosity measurement and $6.1\%$ from the beam polarization uncertainty, which are common to all the data points, are separated from the listed values.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties for inclusive jet measurements with jets in the $|\eta|<1$ region. The $A_{LL}$ uncertainty contribution of $0.0007$ from uncertainty in the relative luminosity measurement and $6.1\%$ from the beam polarization uncertainty, which are common to all the data points, are separated from the listed values.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties coupling inclusive jet measurements with jets in the $|\eta|<0.5$ region and jets in the $0.5<|\eta|<1$ region. The $A_{LL}$ uncertainty contribution of $0.0007$ from uncertainty in the relative luminosity measurement and $6.1\%$ from the beam polarization uncertainty, which are common to all the data points, are separated from the listed values.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties coupling inclusive jet measurements with jets in the $0.5<|\eta|<1$ region with dijet measurements with the the $\textrm{sign}(\eta_1) = \textrm{sign}(\eta_2)$ topology. The $A_{LL}$ uncertainty contribution of $0.0007$ from uncertainty in the relative luminosity measurement and $6.1\%$ from the beam polarization uncertainty, which are common to all the data points, are separated from the listed values.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties coupling inclusive jet measurements with jets in the $0.5<|\eta|<1$ region with dijet measurements with the the $\textrm{sign}(\eta_1) \neq \textrm{sign}(\eta_2)$ topology. The $A_{LL}$ uncertainty contribution of $0.0007$ from uncertainty in the relative luminosity measurement and $6.1\%$ from the beam polarization uncertainty, which are common to all the data points, are separated from the listed values.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties coupling inclusive jet measurements with jets in the $|\eta|<0.5$ region with dijet measurements with the the $\textrm{sign}(\eta_1) = \textrm{sign}(\eta_2)$ topology. The $A_{LL}$ uncertainty contribution of $0.0007$ from uncertainty in the relative luminosity measurement and $6.1\%$ from the beam polarization uncertainty, which are common to all the data points, are separated from the listed values.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties coupling inclusive jet measurements with jets in the $|\eta|<0.5$ region with dijet measurements with the the $\textrm{sign}(\eta_1) \neq \textrm{sign}(\eta_2)$ topology. The $A_{LL}$ uncertainty contribution of $0.0007$ from uncertainty in the relative luminosity measurement and $6.1\%$ from the beam polarization uncertainty, which are common to all the data points, are separated from the listed values.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties coupling inclusive jet measurements with jets in the $|\eta|<1$ region with dijet measurements with the the $\textrm{sign}(\eta_1) = \textrm{sign}(\eta_2)$ topology. The $A_{LL}$ uncertainty contribution of $0.0007$ from uncertainty in the relative luminosity measurement and $6.1\%$ from the beam polarization uncertainty, which are common to all the data points, are separated from the listed values.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties coupling inclusive jet measurements with jets in the $|\eta|<1$ region with dijet measurements with the the $\textrm{sign}(\eta_1) \neq \textrm{sign}(\eta_2)$ topology. The $A_{LL}$ uncertainty contribution of $0.0007$ from uncertainty in the relative luminosity measurement and $6.1\%$ from the beam polarization uncertainty, which are common to all the data points, are separated from the listed values.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties for dijet measurements with the $\textrm{sign}(\eta_1) = \textrm{sign}(\eta_2)$ topology. The $A_{LL}$ uncertainty contribution of $0.0007$ from uncertainty in the relative luminosity measurement and $6.1\%$ from the beam polarization uncertainty, which are common to all the data points, are separated from the listed values.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties for dijet measurements with the $\textrm{sign}(\eta_1) \neq \textrm{sign}(\eta_2)$ topology. The $A_{LL}$ uncertainty contribution of $0.0007$ from uncertainty in the relative luminosity measurement and $6.1\%$ from the beam polarization uncertainty, which are common to all the data points, are separated from the listed values.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties coupling dijet measurements with the $\textrm{sign}(\eta_1) \neq \textrm{sign}(\eta_2)$ topology and the $\textrm{sign}(\eta_1) = \textrm{sign}(\eta_2)$ topology. The $A_{LL}$ uncertainty contribution of $0.0007$ from uncertainty in the relative luminosity measurement and $6.1\%$ from the beam polarization uncertainty, which are common to all the data points, are separated from the listed values.

Reference charged particle multiplicity distributions using only pions and kaons ...

Reference charged particle multiplicity distributions using only pions and kaons ...

Reference charged particle multiplicity distributions using only pions and kaons ...

Reference charged particle multiplicity distributions using only pions and kaons ...

Reference charged particle multiplicity distributions using only pions and kaons ...

Reference charged particle multiplicity distributions using only pions and kaons ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...

$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.

$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.

$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.

$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.

$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.

$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.

$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.

$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.

$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.

$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.

$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.

$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.

$\kappa\sigma^2$ as a function of collision energy for Au+Au collisions for 0-5% centrality.

Efficiency uncorrected $C_n$ of net-proton proton and anti-proton multiplicity distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ = 7.7 - 200 GeV as function of $\left\langle N_\text{part} \right\rangle$.

Efficiencies of proton and anti-proton as a function of $p_\mathrm{T}$ in Au+Au collisions for various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ and collision centralities.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.

Unfolded net-proton multiplicity distributions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}$ = 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.

Unfolded net-proton multiplicity distributions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}$ = 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.

Unfolded net-proton multiplicity distributions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}$ = 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.

Unfolded net-proton multiplicity distributions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}$ = 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.

Unfolded net-proton multiplicity distributions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}$ = 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.

Unfolded net-proton multiplicity distributions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}$ = 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.

Unfolded net-proton multiplicity distributions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}$ = 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.

Cumulant ratios as a function of $N_{part}$ for net-proton distributions in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

Cumulant ratios as a function of $N_{part}$ for net-proton distributions in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

Collision centrality dependence of proton, anti-proton and net-proton cumulants

Cumulants and their ratios as a function of $<N_{part}>$, for the net-proton distribution

Centrality dependence of normalized correlation functions $\kappa_n/$kappa_1$ for proton and anti-proton multiplicity distribution

Rapidity acceptance dependence of cumulants of proton, anti-proton and net-proton multiplicity distributions in 0-5% central Au+Au collision ...

Rapidity acceptance dependence of normalized correlation functions up to fourth order.

Rapidity-acceptance dependence of cumulant ratios of proton, anti-proton and net-proton multiplicity distributions in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions...

pT-acceptance dependence of cumulants of proton, anti-proton and net-proton multiplicity distributions for 0-5% central Au+Au collisions ...

pT-acceptance dependence of the normalized correlation functions up to fourth order ($\kappa_n/\kappa_1$, $n$ = 2, 3, 4) for proton and anti-proton multiplicity distributions in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions ...

pT-acceptance dependence of cumulant ratios of proton, anti-proton and net-proton multiplicity distributions for 0-5% central Au+Au collisions ...

Cumulant ratios from HRG model as a function of collision energy $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$

UrQMD results on pT acceptance dependence for cumulant ratios for proton and baryon

Polynomial fit of cumulant ratios as a function of collision energy $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$

Polynomial fit of cumulant ratios as a function of collision energy $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$

Polynomial fit of cumulant ratios as a function of collision energy $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$

Collision energy dependence of $C_2/C_1$, $C_3/C_2$ and $C_4/C_2$ for net-proton multiplicity distribution in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions. The expreimental net-proton measurements are compared to corresponding values from UrQMD and HRG models within the expreimental acceptances.

Collision energy dependence of $C_2/C_1$, $C_3/C_2$ and $C_4/C_2$ for net-proton multiplicity distribution in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions. The expreimental net-proton measurements are compared to corresponding values from UrQMD and HRG models within the expreimental acceptances.

Collision energy dependence of $C_2/C_1$, $C_3/C_2$ and $C_4/C_2$ for net-proton multiplicity distribution in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions. The expreimental net-proton measurements are compared to corresponding values from UrQMD and HRG models within the expreimental acceptances.

Collision energy dependence of $C_2/C_1$, $C_3/C_2$ and $C_4/C_2$ for net-proton multiplicity distribution in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions. The expreimental net-proton measurements are compared to corresponding values from UrQMD and HRG models within the expreimental acceptances.

Collision energy dependence of $C_2/C_1$, $C_3/C_2$ and $C_4/C_2$ for net-proton multiplicity distribution in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions. The expreimental net-proton measurements are compared to corresponding values from UrQMD and HRG models within the expreimental acceptances.

Collision energy dependence of $C_2/C_1$, $C_3/C_2$ and $C_4/C_2$ for net-proton multiplicity distribution in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions. The expreimental net-proton measurements are compared to corresponding values from UrQMD and HRG models within the expreimental acceptances.

Collision energy dependence of $C_2/C_1$, $C_3/C_2$ and $C_4/C_2$ for net-proton multiplicity distribution in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions. The expreimental net-proton measurements are compared to corresponding values from UrQMD and HRG models within the expreimental acceptances.

$m_{\rm inv}$ dependences of $\Delta\gamma$ in 20-50$\%$ Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV.

The $\pi$ pair $\Delta\gamma$ at $m_{\rm inv} > m_{\rm inv}^{\rm low}$ for the data identified by TPC and more extended $p_T$ range identified by TPC and TOF.

The elliptic flow $v_2$ in bins of $q_2$ for the three centrality bins in the 20-50$\%$ range of Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV.

$m_{\rm inv}$ dependences of the $\Delta\gamma$ from ESE-selected event samples A (50$\%$ largest $q_{2}$) and B (50$\%$ smallest $q_{2}$) in 20-50$\%$ Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV.

$m_{\rm inv}$ dependences of the $\rm \Delta\gamma_{A} - \Delta\gamma_{B}$ in 20-50$\%$ Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV.

$\Delta\gamma_{\rm A}$ versus $\Delta\gamma_{\rm B}$ in 20-50$\%$ Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. (The data are arranged as function of mass)

Summary of results for cross-section of prompt psi(2S) decaying to a muon pair in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of Upsilon(1S) decaying to a muon pair in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of Upsilon(2S) decaying to a muon pair in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of Upsilon(3S) decaying to a muon pair in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of J/psi decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of psi(2S) decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of J/psi decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of center-of-mass rapdiity in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of psi(2S) decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of center-of-mass rapdiity in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of Upsilon(nS) decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for cross-section of Upsilon(nS) decaying to a muon pair in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV in nb/GeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for RpPb of prompt J/psi in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of pT. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for RpPb of non-prompt J/psi in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of pT. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for RpPb of prompt J/psi in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of ystar. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for RpPb of non-prompt J/psi in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of ystar. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for RpPb of Upsilon(1S) in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of pT. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for RpPb of Upsilon(1S) in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of ystar. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for RpPb of quarkonia (prompt J/psi, non-prompt J/psi, prompt psi(2S), Upsilon(1S)) to RpPb of Z ratio in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for quarkonia self-normalized yields in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of self-normalized event activity. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for prompt Psi(2S) to J/psi double ratio in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of center-of-mass rapidity. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for Upsilon(2S) and Upsilon(3S) to Upsilon(1S) double ratio in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV. Uncertainties are statistical and systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for prompt Psi(2S) and J/psi double ratio in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Summary of results for Upsilon(2S) and Upsilon(3S) to Upsilon(1S) double ratio in p+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV as a function of centrality. Uncertainties are statistical and local systematic and global systematic, respectively.

Covariance matrix of the relative cross-section as function of the top quark pT, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix for the absolute cross-section as function of the hadronic top-quark top quark pT, accounting for the statistic and systematic uncertainties in the boosted topology.

Covariance matrix for the absolute cross-section as function of the hadronic top-quark top quark pT, accounting for the statistic and systematic uncertainties in the boosted topology.

Covariance matrix for the relative cross-section as function of the hadronic top-quark top quark pT, accounting for the statistic and systematic uncertainties in the boosted topology.

Covariance matrix for the relative cross-section as function of the hadronic top-quark top quark pT, accounting for the statistic and systematic uncertainties in the boosted topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the top quark, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the top quark, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the relative cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the top quark, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the relative cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the top quark, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix for the absolute cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the top quark, accounting for the statistic and systematic uncertainties in the boosted topology.

Covariance matrix for the absolute cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the top quark, accounting for the statistic and systematic uncertainties in the boosted topology.

Covariance matrix for the relative cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the top quark, accounting for the statistic and systematic uncertainties in the boosted topology.

Covariance matrix for the relative cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the top quark, accounting for the statistic and systematic uncertainties in the boosted topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the mass of the tt̄ system, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the mass of the tt̄ system, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the relative cross-section as function of the mass of the tt̄ system, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the relative cross-section as function of the mass of the tt̄ system, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the tt̄ system pT, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the tt̄ system pT, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the relative cross-section as function of the tt̄ system pT, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the relative cross-section as function of the tt̄ system pT, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the tt̄ system, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the tt̄ system, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the tt̄ system, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Covariance matrix of the absolute cross-section as function of the absolute value of the rapidity of the tt̄ system, accounting for the statistical and systematic uncertainties in the resolved topology.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the top quark transverse momentum in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the top quark transverse momentum in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the top quark transverse momentum in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the top quark transverse momentum in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the top quark rapidity in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the top quark rapidity in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the top quark rapidity in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the top quark rapidity in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the tt̄ system transverse momentum in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the tt̄ system transverse momentum in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the tt̄ system transverse momentum in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the tt̄ system transverse momentum in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the tt̄ system rapidity in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the tt̄ system rapidity in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the tt̄ system rapidity in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the tt̄ system rapidity in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the mass of the tt̄ system in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the mass of the tt̄ system in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the mass of the tt̄ system in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the mass of the tt̄ system in the resolved regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the top quark transverse momentum in the boosted regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the top quark transverse momentum in the boosted regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the top quark transverse momentum in the boosted regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the top quark transverse momentum in the boosted regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the top quark rapidity in the boosted regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the absolute differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the top quark rapidity in the boosted regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the top quark rapidity in the boosted regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.

Table of systematic uncertainties for the relative differential cross-section at particle level for the absolute value of the top quark rapidity in the boosted regime. Note that the values shown here are obtained by propagating the individual uncertainties to the measured cross-sections, while the covariance matrices are evaluated using pseudo-experiments as described in the text.