Probability of finding at least one TAR jet, where the p_T-leading TAR jet passes the m_Wcand and D₂^β=1 requirements, as a function of m_s. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m_Z'=2100 GeV, with the preselections applied.

Probability of finding a W_had candidate reconstructed as a pair of R=0.4 PFlow jets, as a function of m_s. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m_Z'=500 GeV, with the preselections applied that do not pass the requirements of the merged category.

Probability of finding a W_had candidate reconstructed as a pair of R=0.4 PFlow jets, as a function of m_s. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m_Z'=1000 GeV, with the preselections applied that do not pass the requirements of the merged category.

Probability of finding a W_had candidate reconstructed as a pair of R=0.4 PFlow jets, as a function of m_s. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m_Z'=1700 GeV, with the preselections applied that do not pass the requirements of the merged category.

Probability of finding a W_had candidate reconstructed as a pair of R=0.4 PFlow jets, as a function of m_s. The probability is determined in a sample of signal events with m_Z'=2100 GeV, with the preselections applied that do not pass the requirements of the merged category.

Observed exclusion contour at 95% C.L. for the dark Higgs model in the (m_Z', m_s) plane for g_q=0.25, g_χ=1, m_χ=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.

Expected exclusion contour at 95% C.L. for the dark Higgs model in the (m_Z', m_s) plane for g_q=0.25, g_χ=1, m_χ=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.

Expected+1σ exclusion contour at 95% C.L. for the dark Higgs model in the (m_Z', m_s) plane for g_q=0.25, g_χ=1, m_χ=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.

Expected-1σ exclusion contour at 95% C.L. for the dark Higgs model in the (m_Z', m_s) plane for g_q=0.25, g_χ=1, m_χ=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.

Expected+2σ exclusion contour at 95% C.L. for the dark Higgs model in the (m_Z', m_s) plane for g_q=0.25, g_χ=1, m_χ=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.

Expected-2σ exclusion contour at 95% C.L. for the dark Higgs model in the (m_Z', m_s) plane for g_q=0.25, g_χ=1, m_χ=200 GeV, and sinθ=0.01.

Observed upper limits at 95% C.L. on σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W^± W^∓) for m_Z'=0.5 TeV as a function of m_s. The expected limits, varied up and down by one and two standard deviations, are shown as green and yellow bands, respectively. The observed and expected limits are compared to the theoretical LO cross section for the σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W^± W^∓) process for m_Z'=0.5 TeV, shown in dashed blue.

Observed upper limits at 95% C.L. on σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W^± W^∓) for m_Z'=1 TeV as a function of m_s. The expected limits, varied up and down by one and two standard deviations, are shown as green and yellow bands, respectively. The observed and expected limits are compared to the theoretical LO cross section for the σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W^± W^∓) process for m_Z'=1 TeV, shown in dashed blue.

Observed upper limits at 95% C.L. on σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W^± W^∓) for m_Z'=1.7 TeV as a function of m_s. The expected limits, varied up and down by one and two standard deviations, are shown as green and yellow bands, respectively. The observed and expected limits are compared to the theoretical LO cross section for the σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W^± W^∓) process for m_Z'=1.7 TeV, shown in dashed blue.

Observed upper limits at 95% C.L. on σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W^± W^∓) for m_Z'=2.1 TeV as a function of m_s. The expected limits, varied up and down by one and two standard deviations, are shown as green and yellow bands, respectively. The observed and expected limits are compared to the theoretical LO cross section for the σ(pp → s χχ) × B(s → W^± W^∓) process for m_Z'=2.1 TeV, shown in dashed blue.

Data overlaid on SM background yields stacked in each SR and CR category after the fit to data ('Post-fit'). The yields in the SR are broken down into their contributions to the individual bins. The maximum-likelihood estimators are set to the conditional values of the CR-only fit, and propagated to SR and CRs.

Dominant sources of uncertainty for three dark Higgs scenarios after the fit to data. The uncertainties are quantified in terms of their contribution to the fitted signal uncertainty that is expressed relative to the theory prediction. Three representative dark Higgs signal scenarios with g_q=0.25, g_χ=1.0, sinθ=0.01 and m_χ=200 GeV are considered, which are indicated using the (m_Z', m_s) format in units of GeV in the table columns.

Cumulative efficiencies in the merged category for three representative dark Higgs signal scenarios with g_q=0.25, g_χ=1.0, sinθ=0.01, m_Z' = 1 TeV, and m_χ=200 GeV considering s→W(ℓν)W(qq) decays only.

Cumulative efficiencies in the resolved category for three representative dark Higgs signal scenarios with g_q=0.25, g_χ=1.0, sinθ=0.01, m_Z' = 1 TeV, and m_χ=200 GeV considering s→W(ℓν)W(qq) decays only.

Theoretical cross section for &sigma;(pp &rarr; s&chi;&chi;) &times; B(s &rarr; W^&plusmn;W^&#8723;) for each of the dark Higgs signal points at m_Z′ ={300, 350, 400, 500, 750} GeV, with g_q = 0.25, g<sub>&chi; = 1.0, sin&theta; = 0.01, m_Z′ = 1 TeV , and m_&chi; = 200 GeV. Also shown are experimentally excluded cross sections of &sigma;(pp &rarr; s&chi;&chi;) &times; B(s &rarr; W^&plusmn;W^&#8723;) (Obs.) together with the expectations (Exp.) varied up and down by one standard deviation (&plusmn;1&sigma;).

Theoretical cross section for &sigma;(pp &rarr; s&chi;&chi;) &times; B(s &rarr; W^&plusmn;W^&#8723;) for each of the dark Higgs signal points at m_Z′ ={1000, 1700} GeV, with g_q = 0.25, g<sub>&chi; = 1.0, sin&theta; = 0.01, m_Z′ = 1 TeV , and m_&chi; = 200 GeV. Also shown are experimentally excluded cross sections of &sigma;(pp &rarr; s&chi;&chi;) &times; B(s &rarr; W^&plusmn;W^&#8723;) (Obs.) together with the expectations (Exp.) varied up and down by one standard deviation (&plusmn;1&sigma;).

Theoretical cross section for &sigma;(pp &rarr; s&chi;&chi;) &times; B(s &rarr; W^&plusmn;W^&#8723;) for each of the dark Higgs signal points at m_Z′ ={2100, 2500, 2900, 3300} GeV, with g_q = 0.25, g<sub>&chi; = 1.0, sin&theta; = 0.01, m_Z′ = 1 TeV , and m_&chi; = 200 GeV. Also shown are experimentally excluded cross sections of &sigma;(pp &rarr; s&chi;&chi;) &times; B(s &rarr; W^&plusmn;W^&#8723;) (Obs.) together with the expectations (Exp.) varied up and down by one standard deviation (&plusmn;1&sigma;).

Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.

Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.

Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.

Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.

Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.

Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.

Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.

Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.

Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.

Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.

Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.

Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.

Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.

Extrapolated average transverse momenta ⟨pT ⟩ as a function of dNch/dy for different particle species in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. Statistical uncertainties are represented by the error bars at the points while the systematic uncertainties are represented by the gray bars. The π, charged K and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].

Extrapolated average transverse momenta ⟨pT ⟩ as a function of dNch/dy for different particle species in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. Statistical uncertainties are represented by the error bars at the points while the systematic uncertainties are represented by the gray bars. The π, charged K and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].

KS0 dN/dpT spectra compared to the charged Kaon spectra for the event centrality of 0-5% and 30-40%. The charged Kaons data points are for rapidity range of |y| < 0.1 and were extracted from Ref. [14].

KS0 dN/dpT spectra compared to the charged Kaon spectra for the event centrality of 0-5% and 30-40%. The charged Kaons data points are for rapidity range of |y| < 0.1 and were extracted from Ref. [14].

KS0 dN/dpT spectra compared to the charged Kaon spectra for the event centrality of 0-5% and 30-40%. The charged Kaons data points are for rapidity range of |y| < 0.1 and were extracted from Ref. [14].

KS0 dN/dpT spectra compared to the charged Kaon spectra for the event centrality of 0-5% and 30-40%. The charged Kaons data points are for rapidity range of |y| < 0.1 and were extracted from Ref. [14].

Strange particle production yields at mid-rapidity in central Au+Au and Pb+Pb collisions versus the center of mass energy √sNN. The top panel shows results for K0S and Λ. The AGS values are from E896 [1] (centrality 0 − 5 %). The SPS values are from NA49 [20] (centrality 0 − 7 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [4, 15] (centrality 0 − 5 %). For the multi-strange baryons Ξ and Ω (bottom panel), the SPS results are from NA57 [2] (centrality 0 − 11 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [15, 21] (centrality 0 − 20 %).

Strange particle production yields at mid-rapidity in central Au+Au and Pb+Pb collisions versus the center of mass energy √sNN. The top panel shows results for K0S and Λ. The AGS values are from E896 [1] (centrality 0 − 5 %). The SPS values are from NA49 [20] (centrality 0 − 7 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [4, 15] (centrality 0 − 5 %). For the multi-strange baryons Ξ and Ω (bottom panel), the SPS results are from NA57 [2] (centrality 0 − 11 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [15, 21] (centrality 0 − 20 %).

Strange particle production yields at mid-rapidity in central Au+Au and Pb+Pb collisions versus the center of mass energy √sNN. The top panel shows results for K0S and Λ. The AGS values are from E896 [1] (centrality 0 − 5 %). The SPS values are from NA49 [20] (centrality 0 − 7 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [4, 15] (centrality 0 − 5 %). For the multi-strange baryons Ξ and Ω (bottom panel), the SPS results are from NA57 [2] (centrality 0 − 11 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [15, 21] (centrality 0 − 20 %).

Strange particle production yields at mid-rapidity in central Au+Au and Pb+Pb collisions versus the center of mass energy √sNN. The top panel shows results for K0S and Λ. The AGS values are from E896 [1] (centrality 0 − 5 %). The SPS values are from NA49 [20] (centrality 0 − 7 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [4, 15] (centrality 0 − 5 %). For the multi-strange baryons Ξ and Ω (bottom panel), the SPS results are from NA57 [2] (centrality 0 − 11 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [15, 21] (centrality 0 − 20 %).

Anti-baryon to baryon yield ratios for strange baryons versus the center of mass energy √sNN. Λ/Λ is shown in the top panel while the multi-strange baryons are on the bottom panel. The data from AGS are not corrected for the weak decay feed-down from the multistrange baryons while the data from SPS and RHIC are corrected. The lines are the results of a thermal model calculation (see text section IV A). The AGS values are from E896 [1] (centrality 0 − 5 %). The SPS values are from NA49 [20] (centrality 0 − 7 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [4, 15] (centrality 0 − 5 %). For the multi- strange baryons Ξ and Ω (bottom panel), the SPS results are from NA57 [2] (centrality 0 − 11 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [15, 21] (centrality 0 − 20 %).

Anti-baryon to baryon yield ratios for strange baryons versus the center of mass energy √sNN. Λ/Λ is shown in the top panel while the multi-strange baryons are on the bottom panel. The data from AGS are not corrected for the weak decay feed-down from the multistrange baryons while the data from SPS and RHIC are corrected. The lines are the results of a thermal model calculation (see text section IV A). The AGS values are from E896 [1] (centrality 0 − 5 %). The SPS values are from NA49 [20] (centrality 0 − 7 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [4, 15] (centrality 0 − 5 %). For the multi- strange baryons Ξ and Ω (bottom panel), the SPS results are from NA57 [2] (centrality 0 − 11 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [15, 21] (centrality 0 − 20 %).

Antibaryon-to-baryon yield ratios for strange particles and protons as a function of dNch/dy at √sNN=62.4 and 200 GeV. The p data were extracted from Ref. [14]. The √sNN=200 GeV strange hadron data were extracted from Ref. [15].

Antibaryon-to-baryon yield ratios for strange particles and protons as a function of dNch/dy at √sNN=62.4 and 200 GeV. The p data were extracted from Ref. [14]. The √sNN=200 GeV strange hadron data were extracted from Ref. [15].

Particle-yield ratios as obtained by measurements (black dots) for the most central (0–5%) Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV and statistical model predictions (lines). The ratios indicated by the dashed lines (blue) were obtained by using only π, K, and protons, whereas the ratios indicated by the full lines (green) were obtained by also using the hyperons in the fit.

Particle-yield ratios as obtained by measurements (black dots) for the most central (0–5%) Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV and statistical model predictions (lines). The ratios indicated by the dashed lines (blue) were obtained by using only π, K, and protons, whereas the ratios indicated by the full lines (green) were obtained by also using the hyperons in the fit.

Chemical freeze-out temperature Tch (a) and strangeness saturation factor γs (b) as a function of the mean number of participants.

Chemical freeze-out temperature Tch (a) and strangeness saturation factor γs (b) as a function of the mean number of participants.

Chemical freeze-out temperature Tch (a) and strangeness saturation factor γs (b) as a function of the mean number of participants.

Chemical freeze-out temperature Tch (a) and strangeness saturation factor γs (b) as a function of the mean number of participants.

Temperature and baryon chemical potential obtained from thermal model fits as a function of √sNN (see Ref. [22]). The dashed lines correspond to the parametrizations given in Ref. [22]. The solid stars show the result for √sNN=62.4 and 200 GeV.

Temperature and baryon chemical potential obtained from thermal model fits as a function of √sNN (see Ref. [22]). The dashed lines correspond to the parametrizations given in Ref. [22]. The solid stars show the result for √sNN=62.4 and 200 GeV.

Temperature and baryon chemical potential obtained from thermal model fits as a function of √sNN (see Ref. [22]). The dashed lines correspond to the parametrizations given in Ref. [22]. The solid stars show the result for √sNN=62.4 and 200 GeV.

Temperature and baryon chemical potential obtained from thermal model fits as a function of √sNN (see Ref. [22]). The dashed lines correspond to the parametrizations given in Ref. [22]. The solid stars show the result for √sNN=62.4 and 200 GeV.

Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π+ as a function of dNch/dy for √sNN=62.4 GeV (left) and √sNN=200 GeV (right). The π and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].

Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π- as a function of dNch/dy for √sNN=62.4 GeV (left) and √sNN=200 GeV (right). The π and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].

Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π+ as a function of dNch/dy for √sNN=62.4 GeV (left) and √sNN=200 GeV (right). The π and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].

Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π- as a function of dNch/dy for √sNN=62.4 GeV (left) and √sNN=200 GeV (right). The π and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].

Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π+ as a function of dNch/dy for √sNN=62.4 GeV (left) and √sNN=200 GeV (right). The π and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].

Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π- as a function of dNch/dy for √sNN=62.4 GeV (left) and √sNN=200 GeV (right). The π and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].

Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π+ as a function of dNch/dy for √sNN=62.4 GeV (left) and √sNN=200 GeV (right). The π and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].

Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π- as a function of dNch/dy for √sNN=62.4 GeV (left) and √sNN=200 GeV (right). The π and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].

Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π− as a function of √sNN. The lines are the results of the thermal model calculation (see text Sec. 4a). The SPS values are from NA49 [20] (centrality 0–7%) and the RHIC values are from STAR [4, 15] (centrality 0–5%). For the multistrange baryons Ξ and Ω (bottom), the SPS results are from NA57 [2] (centrality 0–11%) and the RHIC values are from STAR [15, 21] (centrality 0–20%).

Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π− as a function of √sNN. The lines are the results of the thermal model calculation (see text Sec. 4a). The SPS values are from NA49 [20] (centrality 0–7%) and the RHIC values are from STAR [4, 15] (centrality 0–5%). For the multistrange baryons Ξ and Ω (bottom), the SPS results are from NA57 [2] (centrality 0–11%) and the RHIC values are from STAR [15, 21] (centrality 0–20%).

Nuclear modification factor RCP, calculated as the ratio between 0–10% central spectra and 40–80% peripheral spectra, for π, K0S, Λ, and Ξ particles in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The π RCP values were extracted from Ref. [10]. The gray band on the right side of the plot shows the uncertainties on the estimation of the number of binary collisions and the gray band on the lower left side indicates the uncertainties on the number of participants.

Nuclear modification factor RCP, calculated as the ratio between 0–10% central spectra and 40–80% peripheral spectra, for π, K0S, Λ, and Ξ particles in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The π RCP values were extracted from Ref. [10]. The gray band on the right side of the plot shows the uncertainties on the estimation of the number of binary collisions and the gray band on the lower left side indicates the uncertainties on the number of participants.

Nuclear modification factor RCP, calculated as the ratio between 0–5% central spectra and 40–60% peripheral spectra, for Λ and Ξ particles measured in Au + Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The gray band corresponds to the equivalent RCP curve for the Λ particles measured in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV [15].

Nuclear modification factor RCP, calculated as the ratio between 0–5% central spectra and 40–60% peripheral spectra, for Λ and Ξ particles measured in Au + Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The gray band corresponds to the equivalent RCP curve for the Λ particles measured in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV [15].

Λ/K0S ratio as a function of transverse momentum for different centrality classes. 0–5% (solid circles), 40–60% (open squares), and 60–80% (solid triangles) in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV.

Λ/K0S ratio as a function of transverse momentum for different centrality classes. 0–5% (solid circles), 40–60% (open squares), and 60–80% (solid triangles) in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV.

Maximum value of the Λ/K0S ratio from Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV (solid circles) and 200 GeV (open circles) [11] as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ for different centrality classes. The lowest ⟨Npart⟩ point corresponds to p+p collisions at 200 GeV [44]. The maximum of the Λ––/K0S from Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV is shown as solid triangles.

Maximum value of the Λ/K0S ratio from Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV (solid circles) and 200 GeV (open circles) [11] as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ for different centrality classes. The lowest ⟨Npart⟩ point corresponds to p+p collisions at 200 GeV [44]. The maximum of the Λ––/K0S from Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV is shown as solid triangles.

The unfolded differential charge asymmetry as a function of the transverse momentum of the top pair system. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NNLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The scale uncertainty is obtained by varying renormalisation and factorisation scales independently by a factor of 2 or 0.5 around $\mu_0$ to calculate the maximum and minimum value of the asymmetry, respectively. The nominal value $\mu_0$ is chosen as $H_T/4$. The variations in which one scale is multiplied by 2 while the other scale is divided by 2 are excluded. Finally, the scale and MC integration uncertainties are added in quadrature.

The unfolded differential charge asymmetry as a function of the longitudinal boost of the top pair system. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NNLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The scale uncertainty is obtained by varying renormalisation and factorisation scales independently by a factor of 2 or 0.5 around $\mu_0$ to calculate the maximum and minimum value of the asymmetry, respectively. The nominal value $\mu_0$ is chosen as $H_T/4$. The variations in which one scale is multiplied by 2 while the other scale is divided by 2 are excluded. Finally, the scale and MC integration uncertainties are added in quadrature.

The unfolded inclusive leptonic asymmetry. The unfolded $A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ is obtained in the reduced phase-space defined by the requirement $|\Delta |\eta_{\ell\bar{\ell}}||<2.5$. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The theory uncertainty is obtained by varying both scales by a factor of 0.5 or 2.0 to calculate the minimum and maximum value of the asymmetry, respectively.

The unfolded differential leptonic asymmetry as a function of the invariant mass of the di-lepton pair. The unfolded $A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ is obtained in the reduced phase-space defined by the requirement $|\Delta |\eta_{\ell\bar{\ell}}||<2.5$. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The theory uncertainty is obtained by varying both scales by a factor of 0.5 or 2.0 to calculate the minimum and maximum value of the asymmetry, respectively.

The unfolded differential leptonic asymmetry as a function of the transverse momentum of the di-lepton pair. The unfolded $A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ is obtained in the reduced phase-space defined by the requirement $|\Delta |\eta_{\ell\bar{\ell}}||<2.5$. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The theory uncertainty is obtained by varying both scales by a factor of 0.5 or 2.0 to calculate the minimum and maximum value of the asymmetry, respectively.

The unfolded differential leptonic asymmetry as a function of the longitudinal boost of the di-lepton pair. The unfolded $A_C^{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ is obtained in the reduced phase-space defined by the requirement $|\Delta |\eta_{\ell\bar{\ell}}||<2.5$. The measured values are given with statistical and systematic uncertainties. The SM theory predictions calculated at NLO in QCD and NLO in EW theory are listed. The theory uncertainty is obtained by varying both scales by a factor of 0.5 or 2.0 to calculate the minimum and maximum value of the asymmetry, respectively.

Individual 68% and 95% CL bounds on the relevant Wilson coefficients of the SM Effective Field Theory in units of $\text{TeV}^{-2}$. The bounds are derived from the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ inclusive measurement. The experimental uncertainties are accounted for, in the form of the complete covariance matrix that keeps track of correlations between bins for the differential measurement. The theory uncertainty from the NNLO QCD + NLO EW calculation is included by explicitly varying the renormalization and factorization scales, or the parton density functions, in the calculation and registering the variations in the intervals.

Individual 68% and 95% CL bounds on the relevant Wilson coefficients of the SM Effective Field Theory in units of $\text{TeV}^{-2}$. The bounds are derived from the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement. The experimental uncertainties are accounted for, in the form of the complete covariance matrix that keeps track of correlations between bins for the differential measurement. The theory uncertainty from the NNLO QCD + NLO EW calculation is included by explicitly varying the renormalization and factorization scales, or the parton density functions, in the calculation and registering the variations in the intervals.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ inclusive measurement. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [0,0.3]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [0.3,0.6]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [0.6,0.8]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [0.8,1]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $m_{t\bar{t}}$ < 500 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $m_{t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [500,750] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $m_{t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [750,1000] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $m_{t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [1000,1500] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $m_{t\bar{t}}$ > 1500 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ < 30 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ $\in$ [30,120] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ measurement for $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ > 120 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ inclusive measurement. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$[0,0.3]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$[0.3,0.6]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$[0.6,0.8]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$[0.8,1]. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ < 200 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$ [200,300] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$ [300,400] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ > 400 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ < 20 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ $\in$ [20, 70] GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Ranking of the systematic uncertainties with marginalisation for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement for $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ > 70 GeV. The effect on unfolded $A_C$ for down and up variation of the systematic uncertainty is shown, respectively. The pulls and constraints of the ranked NPs are obtained from data.

Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ inclusive measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.

Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.

Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.

Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.

Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ inclusive measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.

Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.

Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.

Post-marginalisation correlation coefficients $\rho_{ij}$ of nuisance parameters for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement. Only $|\rho_{ij}| > 0.05$ values are included.

Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $m_{t\bar{t}}$ measurement.

Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $p_{T,t\bar{t}}$ measurement.

Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{t\bar{t}}$ vs $\beta_{z,t\bar{t}}$ measurement.

Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $m_{\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement.

Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $p_{T,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement.

Covariance matrix for the $A_C^{\ell\ell}$ vs $\beta_{z,\ell\bar{\ell}}$ measurement.

Results for the spin-exotic $1^{-+}1^+[\pi\pi]_{1^{-\,-}}\pi P$ wave from the free-isobar partial-wave analysis performed in the fourth $t^\prime$ bin from $0.326$ to $1.000\;(\text{GeV}/c)^2$. The plotted values represent the intensity of the coherent sum of the dynamic isobar amplitudes $\{\mathcal{T}_k^\text{fit}\}$ as a function of $m_{3\pi}$, where the coherent sums run over all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins indexed by $k$. These intensity values are given in number of events per $40\;\text{MeV}/c^2$ $m_{3\pi}$ interval and correspond to the orange points in Fig. 8(b). In the "Resources" section of this $t^\prime$ bin, we provide the JSON file named <code>transition_amplitudes_tBin_3.json</code> for download, which contains for each $m_{3\pi}$ bin the values of the transition amplitudes $\{\mathcal{T}_k^\text{fit}\}$ for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, their covariances, and further information. The data in this JSON file are organized in independent bins of $m_{3\pi}$. The information in these bins can be accessed via the key <code>m3pi_bin_<#>_t_prime_bin_3</code>. Each independent $m_{3\pi}$ bin contains <ul> <li>the kinematic ranges of the $(m_{3\pi}, t^\prime)$ cell, which are accessible via the keys <code>m3pi_lower_limit</code>, <code>m3pi_upper_limit</code>, <code>t_prime_lower_limit</code>, and <code>t_prime_upper_limit</code>.</li> <li>the $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bin borders, which are accessible via the keys <code>m2pi_lower_limits</code> and <code>m2pi_upper_limits</code>.</li> <li>the real and imaginary parts of the transition amplitudes $\{\mathcal{T}_k^\text{fit}\}$ for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, which are accessible via the keys <code>transition_amplitudes_real_part</code> and <code>transition_amplitudes_imag_part</code>, respectively.</li> <li>the covariance matrix of the real and imaginary parts of the $\{\mathcal{T}_k^\text{fit}\}$ for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, which is accessible via the key <code>covariance_matrix</code>. Note that this matrix is real-valued and that its rows and columns are indexed such that $(\Re,\Im)$ pairs of the transition amplitudes are arranged with increasing $k$.</li> <li>the normalization factors $\mathcal{N}_a$ in Eq. (13) for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, which are accessible via the key <code>normalization_factors</code>.</li> <li>the shape of the zero mode, i.e., the values of $\tilde\Delta_k$ for all $m_{\pi^-\pi^+}$ bins, which is accessible via the key <code>zero_mode_shape</code>.</li> <li>the reference wave, which is accessible via the key <code>reference_wave</code>. Note that this is always the $4^{++}1^+\rho(770)\pi G$ wave.</li> </ul>

No description provided.

Mean K0 multiplicity as a function of Q**2.

Ratio of mean K0 multiplicity to mean charged particle multiplicity.

Differential K0 multiplicity in non-rapidity gap (NRG) data.

Differential K0 multiplicity in large-rapidity gap (LRG) data.

Differential K0 multiplicity in non-rapidity gap (NRG) data.

Differential K0 multiplicity in large-rapidity gap (LRG) data.

No description provided.

No description provided.

The K$\pi$ pair invariant mass distribution integrated over the $K^{*0}$ $p_T$ for minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ =62.4 GeV after mixed-event background subtraction.

The Kπ pair invariant mass distribution for various pT bins (top left) pT = 0.4–0.6 GeV/c in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 200 GeV after the mixed-event background subtraction.

The Kπ pair invariant mass distribution for various pT bins (top right) pT = 0.6–0.8 GeV/c in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV after the mixed-event background subtraction.

The Kπ pair invariant mass distribution for various pT bins (bottom left) pT = 0.8–1.0 GeV/c in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 200 GeV after the mixed-event background subtraction.

The Kπ pair invariant mass distribution for various pT bins (bottom right) pT = 1.0–1.2 GeV/c in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV after the mixed-event background subtraction.

The signal-to-background ratio for $K^{*0}$ measurements as a function of $p_T$ for different collision centrality bins (0-10%, 10-40%, 40-60%, 60-80%) in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV.

$K^{*0}$ mass as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

$K^{*0}$ mass as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

$K^{*0}$ mass as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV

$K^{*0}$ mass as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

$K^{*0}$ width as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV

$K^{*0}$ width as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

$K^{*0}$ width as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV

$K^{*0}$ width as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

The $K^{*0}$ reconstruction efficiency multiplied by the detector acceptance as a function of $p_T$ in Au+Au (|$\eta$| < 0.8) collisions at 200 GeV for different collision centrality bins (0-20% ,20-40% , 40-60%)

The $K^{*0}$ reconstruction efficiency multiplied by the detector acceptance as a function of $p_T$ in Cu+Cu (|$\eta$| < 1.0) collisions at 200 GeV for different collision centrality bins (0-20% ,20-40% , 40-60%)

Mid-rapidity $K^{*0}$ $p_T$ spectra for various collision centrality bins (0-20%, 20-40%, 40-60%, 60-80%) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV

Mid-rapidity $K^{*0}$ $p_T$ spectra for various collision centrality bins (0-20%, 20-40%, 40-60%) in Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV

Mid-rapidity $K^{*0}$ $p_T$ spectra for various collision centrality bins (0-20%, 20-40%, 40-60%, 60-80%) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

Mid-rapidity $K^{*0}$ $p_T$ spectra for various collision centrality bins (0-20%, 20-40%, 40-60%) in Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

The mid-rapidity yields dN/dy of $K^{*0}$ as a function of the average number of participating nucleons, $⟨N_{part}⟩$, for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV

The mid-rapidity yields dN/dy of $K^{*0}$ as a function of the average number of participating nucleons, $⟨N_{part}⟩$, for Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV

The mid-rapidity yields dN/dy of $K^{*0}$ as a function of the average number of participating nucleons, $⟨N_{part}⟩$, for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

The mid-rapidity yields dN/dy of $K^{*0}$ as a function of the average number of participating nucleons, $⟨N_{part}⟩$, for Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

The mid-rapidity $K^{*0}$ $⟨p_T⟩$ as a function $⟨N_{part}⟩$ for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV

The mid-rapidity $K^{*0}$ $⟨p_T⟩$ as a function $⟨N_{part}⟩$ for Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV

The mid-rapidity $K^{*0}$ $⟨p_T⟩$ as a function $⟨N_{part}⟩$ for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

The mid-rapidity $K^{*0}$ $⟨p_T⟩$ as a function $⟨N_{part}⟩$ for Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

The mid-rapidity $⟨p_T⟩$ of $\pi$, K, p and $K^{*0}$ as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$ for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$

Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$

Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$

Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$

Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})N(K^-)$ in Au+Au collisions divided by $N(K^{*0})N(K^-)$ ratio in p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$.

Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})N(K^-)$ in Cu+Cu collisions divided by $N(K^{*0})N(K^-)$ ratio in p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$

Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})N(K^-)$ in d+Au collisions divided by $N(K^{*0})N(K^-)$ ratio in d+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$

Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio in minimum bias Au+Au collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}.

Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio in minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}.

Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio in minimum bias p+p collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}.

Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio in minimum bias Au+Au collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}.

Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio in minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}.

Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio in minimum bias p+p collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}.

Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$

Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$

Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$

Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$

Mid-rapidity $[N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})]$ in Au+Au collisions divided by $[N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})]$ ratio in p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$

Mid-rapidity $[N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})]$ in Cu+Cu collisions divided by $[N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})]$ ratio in p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$

Mid-rapidity $[N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})]$ in d+Au collisions divided by $[N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})]$ ratio in p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$

Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio in minimum bias Au+Au collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$.

Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio in minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$.

Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio in minimum bias p+p collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$.

Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio in minimum bias Au+Au collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$.

Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio in minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$.

Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio in minimum bias p+p collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$.

The $K^{*0}$ $v_2$ (Run IV) as a function of $p_T$ in minimum bias Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

The $K^{*0}$ $v_2$ (Run II) as a function of $p_T$ in minimum bias Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

The $K^{*0}$ $R_{CP}$ as a function of $p_T$ in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 and 200 GeV compared to the $R_{CP}$ of $K^0_S$ and $\Lambda$ at 200 GeV.

The $K^{*0}$ $R_{CP}$ as a function of $p_T$ in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 and 200 GeV compared to the $R_{CP}$ of $K^0_S$ and $\Lambda$ at 200 GeV.

The $K^{*0}$ $R_{CP}$ as a function of $p_T$ in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 and 200 GeV compared to the $R_{CP}$ of $K^0_S$ and $\Lambda$ at 200 GeV.

The $K^{*0}$ ~$R_{CP}$~ as a function of $p_T$ in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 and 200 GeV compared to the $R_{CP}$ of $K^0_S$ and $\Lambda$ at 200 GeV.

Directed flow for $\pi^{+}$ and $\pi^{-}$ versus rapidity for intermediate-centrality (10-40$\%$) Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200, 62.4, 39, 27, 19.6, 11.5 and 7.7 GeV. Errors are statistical only.

Directed flow slope $dv_{1}/dy$ of protons, antiprotons and $\pi^{\pm}$ near midrapidity versus beam energy for intermediate-centrality (10-40$\%$) Au+Au collisions.

Directed flow slope $dv_{1}/dy$ of net-protons near midrapidity versus beam energy for intermediate-centrality (10-40$\%$) Au+Au collisions. Datapoints for protons and antiprotons can be found in Table5.

The same as the left but for Cu+Cu collisions. The systematic errors are shown as thin lines with wide caps at the ends and statistical errors are shown as thick lines with small caps at the end. Statistical and systematic errors are very small.

The difference of charge-independent (CI) v2{2} and like-sign (LS) $v_2\{2\}$ for Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at 200 (top panel) and 62.4 (bottom panel) GeV vs. the log of $\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta\rangle$.The statistical errors are smaller than the marker size and not visible for most of the data.

The difference of charge-independent (CI) v2{2} and like-sign (LS) $v_2\{2\}$ for Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at 200 (top panel) and 62.4 (bottom panel) GeV vs. the log of $\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta\rangle$.The statistical errors are smaller than the marker size and not visible for most of the data.

The difference of charge-independent (CI) v2{2} and like-sign (LS) $v_2\{2\}$ for Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at 200 (top panel) and 62.4 (bottom panel) GeV vs. the log of $\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta\rangle$.The statistical errors are smaller than the marker size and not visible for most of the data.

The difference of charge-independent (CI) v2{2} and like-sign (LS) $v_2\{2\}$ for Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at 200 (top panel) and 62.4 (bottom panel) GeV vs. the log of $\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta\rangle$.The statistical errors are smaller than the marker size and not visible for most of the data.

The LS and CI four-particle cumulant $v_2\{4\}^4$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 and 62.4 GeV for $0.15 < pT < 2.0$ GeV/$c$. The systematic errors are shown as narrow lines with wide caps at the end and statistical errors are shown as thick lines with narrow caps at the end. Statistical errors are not visible for most of the points.

The LS and CI four-particle cumulant $v_2\{4\}^4$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 and 62.4 GeV for $0.15 < pT < 2.0$ GeV/$c$. The systematic errors are shown as narrow lines with wide caps at the end and statistical errors are shown as thick lines with narrow caps at the end. Statistical errors are not visible for most of the points.

The LS and CI four-particle cumulant $v_2\{4\}^4$ for Cu+Cu collisions at 200 and 62.4 GeV for $0.15 < p_T < 2.0$ GeV/c. The most central points (two points for Cu+Cu 62.4 GeV) gives $v_2\{4\}^4 < 0$ for all the data sets. The negative values are probably due to large fluctuations in agreement with Eq. (1). These may include contributions from impact parameter spread and finite multiplicity bin width.

The LS and CI four-particle cumulant $v_2\{4\}^4$ for Cu+Cu collisions at 200 and 62.4 GeV for $0.15 < p_T < 2.0$ GeV/c. The most central points (two points for Cu+Cu 62.4 GeV) gives $v_2\{4\}^4 < 0$ for all the data sets. The negative values are probably due to large fluctuations in agreement with Eq. (1). These may include contributions from impact parameter spread and finite multiplicity bin width.

The difference of charge-independent (CI) $v_2\{4\}$ and like-sign (LS) $v_2\{4\}$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 and 62.4 GeV vs. the log of $\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta\rangle$.

The difference of charge-independent (CI) $v_2\{4\}$ and like-sign (LS) $v_2\{4\}$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 and 62.4 GeV vs. the log of $\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta\rangle$.

(Left) The difference between $v_2\{2\}^2$ and $v_2\{4\}^2$ for 200 GeV Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions for both LS and CI combinations.

(Left) The difference between $v_2\{2\}^2$ and $v_2\{4\}^2$ for 200 GeV Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions for both LS and CI combinations.

(Right) The difference between $v_2\{2\}^2$ and $v_2\{4\}^2$ for 62.4 GeV Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions for both LS and CI combinations. The statistical and systematic errors are shown as in previous figures.

(Right) The difference between $v_2\{2\}^2$ and $v_2\{4\}^2$ for 62.4 GeV Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions for both LS and CI combinations. The statistical and systematic errors are shown as in previous figures.

The upper limit on $\sigma_{v_2}/\langle v_2 \rangle$ for 200 GeV (left) and 62.4 GeV (right) Au+Au collisions from Eq. (9) compared to $\sigma_\varepsilon/\varepsilon$ from Eq. (10) for three different models. The upper limit is found using the LS results for $v_2\{2\}$. Data are from the range $0.15 < p_T < 2.0$ GeV/$c$. The shaded bands reflect the uncertainties on the models which are dominated by uncertainty on the distribution of nucleons inside the nucleus. The uncertainty is only shown for the MCG-N and fKLN-CGC models. The uncertainty on the MCG-Q model is the same as for the MCG-N model but is not shown for the visual clarity.

The upper limit on $\sigma_{v_2}/\langle v_2 \rangle$ for 200 GeV (left) and 62.4 GeV (right) Au+Au collisions from Eq. (9) compared to $\sigma_\varepsilon/\varepsilon$ from Eq. (10) for three different models. The upper limit is found using the LS results for $v_2\{2\}$. Data are from the range $0.15 < p_T < 2.0$ GeV/$c$. The shaded bands reflect the uncertainties on the models which are dominated by uncertainty on the distribution of nucleons inside the nucleus. The uncertainty is only shown for the MCG-N and fKLN-CGC models. The uncertainty on the MCG-Q model is the same as for the MCG-N model but is not shown for the visual clarity.

The upper limit on $\sigma_{v_2}/\langle v_2 \rangle$ for 200 GeV (left) and 62.4 GeV (right) Au+Au collisions from Eq. (9) compared to $\sigma_\varepsilon/\varepsilon$ from Eq. (10) for three different models. The upper limit is found using the LS results for $v_2\{2\}$. Data are from the range $0.15 < p_T < 2.0$ GeV/$c$. The shaded bands reflect the uncertainties on the models which are dominated by uncertainty on the distribution of nucleons inside the nucleus. The uncertainty is only shown for the MCG-N and fKLN-CGC models. The uncertainty on the MCG-Q model is the same as for the MCG-N model but is not shown for the visual clarity.

The upper limit on $\sigma_{v_2}/\langle v_2 \rangle$ for 200 GeV (left) and 62.4 GeV (right) Au+Au collisions from Eq. (9) compared to $\sigma_\varepsilon/\varepsilon$ from Eq. (10) for three different models. The upper limit is found using the LS results for $v_2\{2\}$. Data are from the range $0.15 < p_T < 2.0$ GeV/$c$. The shaded bands reflect the uncertainties on the models which are dominated by uncertainty on the distribution of nucleons inside the nucleus. The uncertainty is only shown for the MCG-N and fKLN-CGC models. The uncertainty on the MCG-Q model is the same as for the MCG-N model but is not shown for the visual clarity.

The STAR data compared to PHOBOS data [34] on $\sigma_{v_2}/\langle v_2 \rangle$ with $\delta_2$ for $\Delta\eta > 2$ taken to be zero (see Fig. 6 from Ref. [34]). The shaded band shows the errors quoted from Ref. [34].

The STAR data compared to PHOBOS data [34] on $\sigma_{v_2}/\langle v_2 \rangle$ with $\delta_2$ for $\Delta\eta > 2$ taken to be zero (see Fig. 6 from Ref. [34]). The shaded band shows the errors quoted from Ref. [34].

The upper limit on $\sigma_{v_2}/\langle v_2 \rangle$ for 200 GeV (left) and 62.4 GeV (right) Cu+Cu collisions from Eq. (9) compared to $\sigma_\varepsilon/\varepsilon$ from Eq. (10) for three different models.

The upper limit on $\sigma_{v_2}/\langle v_2 \rangle$ for 200 GeV (left) and 62.4 GeV (right) Cu+Cu collisions from Eq. (9) compared to $\sigma_\varepsilon/\varepsilon$ from Eq. (10) for three different models.

The upper limit on $\sigma_{v_2}/\langle v_2 \rangle$ for 200 GeV (left) and 62.4 GeV (right) Cu+Cu collisions from Eq. (9) compared to $\sigma_\varepsilon/\varepsilon$ from Eq. (10) for three different models.

The upper limit on $\sigma_{v_2}/\langle v_2 \rangle$ for 200 GeV (left) and 62.4 GeV (right) Cu+Cu collisions from Eq. (9) compared to $\sigma_\varepsilon/\varepsilon$ from Eq. (10) for three different models.