Two-particle transverse momentum correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CI}$ for 0$-$5% multiplicity class pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7\;\text{TeV}$.

Two-particle transverse momentum correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CI}$ for 30$-$40% multiplicity class pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7\;\text{TeV}$.

Two-particle transverse momentum correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CI}$ for 70$-$80% multiplicity class pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7\;\text{TeV}$.

Two-particle transverse momentum correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CD}$ for 0$-$5% multiplicity class p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=5.02\;\text{TeV}$.

Two-particle transverse momentum correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CD}$ for 30$-$40% multiplicity class p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=5.02\;\text{TeV}$.

Two-particle transverse momentum correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CD}$ for 70$-$80% multiplicity class p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=5.02\;\text{TeV}$.

Two-particle transverse momentum correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CI}$ for 0$-$5% multiplicity class p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=5.02\;\text{TeV}$.

Two-particle transverse momentum correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CI}$ for 30$-$40% multiplicity class p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=5.02\;\text{TeV}$.

Two-particle transverse momentum correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CI}$ for 70$-$80% multiplicity class p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=5.02\;\text{TeV}$.

Near side ($|\Delta\varphi| < \pi/2$) longitudinal projection of the two-particle transverse momentum correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CD}$ for 0$-$5%, 30$-$40%, and 70$-$80% multiplicity classes pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7\;\text{TeV}$. Systematic uncertainty on the long-range mean correlator strength $\delta B = 3.7\times 10^{-3}$, $5.8\times 10^{-3}$, and $6.5\times 10^{-3}$, respectively.

Azimuthal projection ($|\Delta\eta|<1.6$) of the two-particle transverse momentum correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CD}$ for 0$-$5%, 30$-$40%, and 70$-$80% multiplicity classes pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7\;\text{TeV}$. Systematic uncertainty on the long-range mean correlator strength $\delta B = 2.1\times 10^{-3}$, $4.3\times 10^{-3}$, and $7.7\times 10^{-3}$, respectively.

Near side ($|\Delta\varphi| < \pi/2$) longitudinal projection of the two-particle transverse momentum correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CI}$ for 0$-$5%, 30$-$40%, and 70$-$80% multiplicity classes pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7\;\text{TeV}$. Systematic uncertainty on the long-range mean correlator strength $\delta B = 2.8\times 10^{-3}$, $6.6\times 10^{-3}$, and $2.9\times 10^{-2}$, respectively.

Azimuthal projection ($|\Delta\eta|<1.6$) of the two-particle transverse momentum correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CI}$ for 0$-$5%, 30$-$40%, and 70$-$80% multiplicity classes pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=7\;\text{TeV}$. Systematic uncertainty on the long-range mean correlator strength $\delta B = 1.4\times 10^{-3}$, $7.2\times 10^{-3}$, and $2.6\times 10^{-2}$, respectively.

Near side ($|\Delta\varphi| < \pi/2$) longitudinal projection of the two-particle transverse momentum correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CD}$ for 0$-$5%, 30$-$40%, and 70$-$80% multiplicity classes p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=5.02\;\text{TeV}$. Systematic uncertainty on the long-range mean correlator strength $\delta B = 1.5\times 10^{-3}$, $2.7\times 10^{-3}$, and $5.0\times 10^{-3}$, respectively.

Azimuthal projection ($|\Delta\eta|<1.6$) of the two-particle transverse momentum correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CD}$ for 0$-$5%, 30$-$40%, and 70$-$80% multiplicity classes p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=5.02\;\text{TeV}$. Systematic uncertainty on the long-range mean correlator strength $\delta B = 7.5\times 10^{-4}$, $1.6\times 10^{-3}$, and $3.6\times 10^{-3}$, respectively.

Near side ($|\Delta\varphi| < \pi/2$) longitudinal projection of the two-particle transverse momentum correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CI}$ for 0$-$5%, 30$-$40%, and 70$-$80% multiplicity classes p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=5.02\;\text{TeV}$. Systematic uncertainty on the long-range mean correlator strength $\delta B = 9.3\times 10^{-5}$, $8.1\times 10^{-4}$, and $6.7\times 10^{-3}$, respectively.

Azimuthal projection ($|\Delta\eta|<1.6$) of the two-particle transverse momentum correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CI}$ for 0$-$5%, 30$-$40%, and 70$-$80% multiplicity classes p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=5.02\;\text{TeV}$. Systematic uncertainty on the long-range mean correlator strength $\delta B = 4.0\times 10^{-4}$, $1.5\times 10^{-3}$, and $7.5\times 10^{-3}$, respectively.

Evolution with the average charged particle multiplicity of the longitudinal widths of the two-particle transverse momentum differential correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CD}$ in pp and p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 7\;\text{TeV}$ and $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 5.02\;\text{TeV}$, respectively. Vertical bars (mostly smaller than the marker size) and filled boxes represent statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively.

Evolution with the average charged particle multiplicity of the azimuthal widths of the two-particle transverse momentum differential correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CD}$ in pp and p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 7\;\text{TeV}$ and $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 5.02\;\text{TeV}$, respectively. Vertical bars (mostly smaller than the marker size) and filled boxes represent statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively.

Evolution with the average charged particle multiplicity of the longitudinal widths of the two-particle transverse momentum differential correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CI}$ in pp and p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 7\;\text{TeV}$ and $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 5.02\;\text{TeV}$, respectively. Vertical bars (mostly smaller than the marker size) and filled boxes represent statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively.

Evolution with the average charged particle multiplicity of the azimuthal widths of the two-particle transverse momentum differential correlation $G_{2}^{\rm CI}$ in pp and p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 7\;\text{TeV}$ and $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 5.02\;\text{TeV}$, respectively. Vertical bars (mostly smaller than the marker size) and filled boxes represent statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively.

$v_3$ vs $p_T$, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, BBCS-FVTXS-CNT detector combination

$v_3$ vs $p_T$, d+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, BBCS-FVTXS-CNT detector combination

$v_3$ vs $p_T$, 3He+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, BBCS-FVTXS-CNT detector combination

$v_2$ vs $p_T$, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, FVTXS-CNT-FVTXN detector combination

$v_2$ vs $p_T$, d+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, FVTXS-CNT-FVTXN detector combination

$v_2$ vs $p_T$, 3He+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, FVTXS-CNT-FVTXN detector combination

$v_2$ ratio vs $p_T$, p/d/3He+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central

$v_3$ vs $p_T$, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, FVTXS-CNT-FVTXN detector combination

$v_3$ vs $p_T$, d+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, FVTXS-CNT-FVTXN detector combination

$v_3$ vs $p_T$, 3He+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, FVTXS-CNT-FVTXN detector combination

$c_2$ vs $\eta$, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central

$c_2$ vs $\eta$, d+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central

$c_2$ vs $\eta$, 3He+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central

$c_3$ vs $\eta$, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central

$c_3$ vs $\eta$, d+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central

$c_3$ vs $\eta$, 3He+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, p+p at 200 GeV, minimum bias, BBCS-FVTXS correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, BBCS-FVTXS correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, d+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, BBCS-FVTXS correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, 3He+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, BBCS-FVTXS correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, p+p at 200 GeV, minimum bias, BBCS-FVTXN correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, BBCS-FVTXN correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, d+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, BBCS-FVTXN correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, 3He+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, BBCS-FVTXN correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, p+p at 200 GeV, minimum bias, FVTXS-FVTXN correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, FVTXS-FVTXN correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, d+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, FVTXS-FVTXN correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, 3He+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, FVTXS-FVTXN correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, p+p at 200 GeV, minimum bias, CNT-BBCS correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, CNT-BBCS correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, d+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, CNT-BBCS correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, 3He+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, CNT-BBCS correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, p+p at 200 GeV, minimum bias, CNT-FVTXS correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, CNT-FVTXS correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, d+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, CNT-FVTXS correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, 3He+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, CNT-FVTXS correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, p+p at 200 GeV, minimum bias, CNT-FVTXN correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, CNT-FVTXN correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, d+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, CNT-FVTXN correlation

$C(\Delta\phi)$ vs $\Delta\phi$, 3He+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, CNT-FVTXN correlation

$c_n$ vs detector combination, p+p at 200 GeV, Minimum Bias

$c_n$ vs $p_T$, p+p at 200 GeV, Minimum Bias, BBCS-CNT detector combination

$c_n$ vs $p_T$, p+p at 200 GeV, Minimum Bias, FVTXS-CNT detector combination

$c_n$ vs $p_T$, p+p at 200 GeV, Minimum Bias, FVTXN-CNT detector combination

$c_n$ vs detector combination, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central

$c_n$ vs $p_T$, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, BBCS-CNT detector combination

$c_n$ vs $p_T$, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, FVTXS-CNT detector combination

$c_n$ vs $p_T$, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, FVTXN-CNT detector combination

$c_n$ vs detector combination, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central

$c_n$ vs $p_T$, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, BBCS-CNT detector combination

$c_n$ vs $p_T$, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, FVTXS-CNT detector combination

$c_n$ vs $p_T$, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, FVTXN-CNT detector combination

$c_n$ vs detector combination, p+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central

$c_n$ vs $p_T$, 3He+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, BBCS-CNT detector combination

$c_n$ vs $p_T$, 3He+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, FVTXS-CNT detector combination

$c_n$ vs $p_T$, 3He+Au at 200 GeV, 0-5% central, FVTXN-CNT detector combination

$p_{T}^{Part}$ vs. $p_{T}^{Det}$ for SubLeading jets with $R = 0.4$.

$p_{T}^{Part}$ vs. $p_{T}^{Det}$ for SubLeading jets with $R = 0.2$.

$A_{J}$ distributions for Au+Au data (filled symbols) and p+p HT $\oplus$ Au+Au MB (open symbols) for low constituent $p_{T}^{Cut}$ di-jets from Fig. 1 compared to $A_{J}$ distributions calculated assuming the RC and EC null hypotheses, respectively, shown as colored bands; see the text for details.

$dN/d\delta p_{T}$ vs. $\delta p_{T}$ for $p_{T}^{Cut} > 2$ GeV/$c$ jets with $R = 0.4$.

$dN/d\delta p_{T}$ vs. $\delta p_{T}$ for $p_{T}^{Cut} > 0.2$ GeV/$c$ matched jets with $R = 0.4$.

$dN/d\delta p_{T}$ vs. $\delta p_{T}$ for $p_{T}^{Cut} > 2$ GeV/$c$ jets with $R = 0.2$.

$dN/d\delta p_{T}$ vs. $\delta p_{T}$ for $p_{T}^{Cut} > 0.2$ GeV/$c$ matched jets with $R = 0.2$.

Repetition of the analysis shown in Fig. 1 with a smaller resolution parameter $R = 0.2$. Normalized $A_{J}$ distributions for Au+Au HT data (filled symbols) and p+p HT $\oplus$ Au+Au MB (open symbols). The red circles are for jets found using only constituents with $p_{T}^{Cut} > 2$ GeV/$c$ and the black squares are for matched jets found using constituents with $p_{T}^{Cut} > 0.2$ GeV/$c$.

Fit results from a fit to data using Eq. 11 to parameterize the femtoscopic correlations and Eq. 15 for non-femtoscopic ones (EMCIC fit from Figure 6 in the paper)

Fit results from a fit to 1D correlation function using Eq. 6 to parameterize the femtoscopic correlations (standard fit from Figure 7 in the paper)

Fit results from a fit to 1D correlation function using Eq. 6 to parameterize the femtoscopic correlations and Eq. 12 for non-femtoscopic ones (delta - q fit from Figure 7 in the paper)

Fit results from a fit to 1D correlation function using Eq. 6 to parameterize the femtoscopic correlations and Eq. 15 for non-femtoscopic ones (EMCIC fit from Figure 7 in the paper). The non-femtoscopic parameters M1−4 were not varied, but kept fixed to the values in Table IV

Multiplicity dependence of fit results to 1D correlation function for different fit parameterizations (Figure 8 in the paper).

Multiplicity dependence of fit parameters to two-dimensional correlation functions using Equations 7 and 8. To consistently compare to previous measurements, Omega was set to unity (c.f. Equation 5).

Measured and calculated asymmetries vs. di-jet pseudorapidity sum for $+\hat{z}$ (left) and $−\hat{z}$ (right) beams. (a,b): Fraction of the calculated di-jet cross section with a quark (gluon) from the $+\hat{z}$ $(−\hat{z})$ beam. (c,d): Unweighted asymmetries compared with pQCD calculations [20] (histograms) for two models of quark Sivers functions fitted to SIDIS results [8]. (e,f): Asymmetries for $|\sin\zeta|$-weighted yields, compared with calculations [20, 21] based on twist-3 quark-gluon correlations. Vertical (horizontal) bars on the data indicate statistical uncertainties (bin widths). The systematic error bands exclude a $\pm12\%$ beam polarization normalization uncertainty.