'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.'

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.

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}"

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.

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.

Centrality dependence of single cumulants C1, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 62.4 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of single cumulants C1, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 200 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of single cumulants C2, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 19.6 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of single cumulants C2, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 27 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of single cumulants C2, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 39 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of single cumulants C2, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 62.4 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of single cumulants C2, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 200 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of single cumulants C3, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 19.6 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of single cumulants C3, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 27 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of single cumulants C3, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 39 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of single cumulants C3, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 62.4 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of single cumulants C3, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 200 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C2/C1, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 19.6 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C2/C1, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 27 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C2/C1, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 39 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C2/C1, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 62.4 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C2/C1, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 200 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C3/C2, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 19.6 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C3/C2, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 27 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C3/C2, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 39 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C3/C2, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 62.4 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C3/C2, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 200 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.

Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C2/C1 in most central (0-5%) and peripheral (50-60%). Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.

Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C3/C2 in most central (0-5%) and peripheral (50-60%). Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.

Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda, net-proton and net-kaon cumulant ratios C2/C1 in most central (0-5%) collision.

Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda, net-proton and net-kaon cumulant ratios C3/C2 in most central (0-5%) collision.

Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C2/C1 in most central (0-5%) collision, along with results from HRG.

Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C3/C2 in most central (0-5%) collision, along with results from HRG.

Rapidity dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C2/C1 in most central (0-5%) collision, along with results from NBD.

Rapidity dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C3/C2 in most central (0-5%) collision, along with results from NBD.

Rapidity dependence of normalized C2 in most central (0-5%) collision at Au+Au 19.6 GeV.

Rapidity dependence of normalized C2 in most central (0-5%) collision at Au+Au 200 GeV.

Inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 16.0-22.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 6 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 22.0-30.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 6 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 30.0-42.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 6 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 42.0-60.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 6 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 60.0-80.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 6 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 5.5-8.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 7 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 8.0-11.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 7 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 11.0-16.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 7 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 16.0-22.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 7 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 22.0-30.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 7 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 30.0-42.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 7 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 42.0-60.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 7 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 60.0-80.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 7 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 5.5-8.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 8 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 8.0-11.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 8 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 11.0-16.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 8 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 16.0-22.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 8 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 22.0-30.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 8 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 30.0-42.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 8 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 42.0-60.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 8 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 60.0-80.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 8 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 5.5-8.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 9 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 8.0-11.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 9 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 11.0-16.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 9 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 16.0-22.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 9 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 22.0-30.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 9 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 30.0-42.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 9 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 42.0-60.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 9 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections measured as a function of $P_T^{\rm jet}$ for $Q^2$ = 60.0-80.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 9 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 5.5-8.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 10 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 8.0-11.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 10 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 11.0-16.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 10 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 16.0-22.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 10 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 22.0-30.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 10 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 30.0-42.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 10 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 42.0-60.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 10 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised dijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_2$ for $Q^2$ = 60.0-80.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 10 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 5.5-8.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 11 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 8.0-11.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 11 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 11.0-16.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 11 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 16.0-22.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 11 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 22.0-30.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 11 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 30.0-42.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 11 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 42.0-60.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 11 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised trijet cross sections measured as a function of $\langle P_T \rangle_3$ for $Q^2$ = 60.0-80.0 GeV$^2$. The correction factors on the theoretical cross sections $c^{\rm had}$ are listed together with their uncertainties. The radiative correction factors $c^{\rm rad}$ are already included in the quoted cross sections. Note that the uncertainties labelled $\delta^{E_{e^\prime}}$ and $\delta^{\theta_{e^\prime}}$ in Table 11 of the paper (arXiv:1611.03421v3) should be swapped. See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Matrix of statistical correlation coefficients of the unfolded jet cross sections at low $Q^2$.

Matrix of statistical correlation coefficients of the unfolded normalised jet cross sections at low $Q^2$.

Inclusive jet cross sections for $P_T^{\rm jet}$ = 5-7 GeV$^2$ measured as a function of $Q^2$ in the range 150-15000 GeV$^2$. The cross section values and uncertainties have been determined in the scope of the analysis of an earlier H1 publication (<a href="https://inspirehep.net/record/1301218">INSPIRE</a>, <a href="https://www.hepdata.net/record/ins1301218">HEPData</a>). See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Normalised inclusive jet cross sections for $P_T^{\rm jet}$ = 5-7 GeV$^2$ measured as a function of $Q^2$ in the range 150-15000 GeV$^2$. The cross section values and uncertainties have been determined in the scope of the analysis of an earlier H1 publication (<a href="https://inspirehep.net/record/1301218">INSPIRE</a>, <a href="https://www.hepdata.net/record/ins1301218">HEPData</a>). See Table 5 of arXiv:1406.4709v2 for details of the correlation model.

Matrix of statistical correlation coefficients of the unfolded jet cross sections at high $Q^2$. The statistical correlations have been determined in the scope of the analysis of an earlier H1 publication (<a href="https://inspirehep.net/record/1301218">INSPIRE</a>, <a href="https://www.hepdata.net/record/ins1301218">HEPData</a>).

Matrix of statistical correlation coefficients of the unfolded normalised jet cross sections at high $Q^2$. The statistical correlations have been determined in the scope of the analysis of an earlier H1 publication (<a href="https://inspirehep.net/record/1301218">INSPIRE</a>, <a href="https://www.hepdata.net/record/ins1301218">HEPData</a>).

The strong coupling extracted from the normalised inclusive jet, dijet and trijet data at NLO as a function of the renormalisation scale $\mu_r$. For each $\mu_r$ the values of the strong coupling $\alpha_s(\mu_r)$ and the equivalent values $\alpha_s(M_Z)$ are given with experimental (exp) and theoretical (th) uncertainties.