Sample correlations in $\Delta\phi$ ($|\Delta\eta|<$ 1.78) for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, 0-95% $d$+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 40-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, and 0-12% central Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. The data are averaged between positive and negative $\Delta\phi$ and reflected in the plot.

Background subtracted sample correlations for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ on the near-side for 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, 0-95% $d$+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 40-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV and 0-12% central Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. The dependence of the jet-like correlation is shown as a function of $\Delta\eta$ ($|\Delta\phi|<$ 0.78). The data are averaged between positive and negative $\Delta\eta$.

Background subtracted sample correlations for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ on the near-side for 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, 0-95% $d$+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 40-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV and 0-12% central Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. The dependence of the jet-like correlation is shown as a function of $\Delta\phi$ ($|\Delta\eta|<$ 1.78). The data are averaged between positive and negative $\Delta\phi$.

Dependence of jet-like yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV. 5% systematic error due to the uncertainty on the associated particle's efficiency is not shown.

Dependence of jet-like yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV. 5% systematic error due to the uncertainty on the associated particle's efficiency is not shown.

Dependence of jet-like yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for $d$+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. 5% systematic error due to the uncertainty on the associated particle's efficiency is not shown.

Dependence of jet-like yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. 5% systematic error due to the uncertainty on the associated particle's efficiency is not shown.

Dependence of jet-like yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. 5% systematic error due to the uncertainty on the associated particle's efficiency is not shown.

Dependence of jet-like yield on $p_T^{\mathrm{trigger}}$ for 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, 0-95% $d$+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 40-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV and 0-12% central Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. The 5% systematic error due to the uncertainty on the associated particle's efficiency is not shown.

Dependence of jet-like yield on $p_T^{\mathrm{associated}}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ for 0-60% Cu+Cu and 0-80% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and 0-95% $d$+Au, 0-60% Cu+Cu, 0-12% Au+Au and 40-80% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. The 5% systematic error due to the uncertainty on the associated particle's efficiency is not shown.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\phi$ on $p_T^{\mathrm{trigger}}$ for 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-95% $d$+Au, 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, and 0-12% and 40-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\phi$ on $p_T^{\mathrm{associated}}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ for 0-95% $d$+Au, 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, and 0-12% and 40-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\phi$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\phi$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\phi$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-95% $d$+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\phi$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\phi$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\eta$ on $p_T^{\mathrm{trigger}}$ for 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-95% $d$+Au, 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, and 0-12% and 40-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\eta$ on $p_T^{\mathrm{associated}}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ for 0-95% $d$+Au, 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV and $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV, and 0-12% and 40-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\eta$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\eta$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-80% Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\eta$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-95% $d$+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\eta$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for 0-60% Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of the widths in $\Delta\eta$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of ridge yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Dependence of ridge yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Dependence of ridge yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of ridge yield on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Ratio of the ridge and jet-like yields on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Ratio of the ridge and jet-like yields on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Ratio of the ridge and jet-like yields on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Ratio of the ridge and jet-like yields on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of $V_{3\Delta}/V_{2\Delta}$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Dependence of $V_{3\Delta}/V_{2\Delta}$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

Dependence of $V_{3\Delta}/V_{2\Delta}$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for $d$+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of $V_{3\Delta}/V_{2\Delta}$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Dependence of $V_{3\Delta}/V_{2\Delta}$ on $N_{part}$ for 3 $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ $<$ 6 GeV/$c$ and 1.5 GeV/$c$ $<$ $p_T^{associated}$ $<$ $p_T^{trigger}$ for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

The invariant yields $d^2N/(2\pi p_T dp_T dy)$ of $K + p(\bar{p})$ in central Au+Au collisions, and NLO calculations with AKK [9] and DSS [10] FF. The uncertainty of yields due to the scale dependence as evaluated in [10] is about a factor of 2. Bars and boxes (bands) represent statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively.

The invariant yields $d^2N/(2\pi p_T dp_T dy)$ of $\rho^0$ in central Au+Au collisions, and NLO calculations with AKK [9] and DSS [10] FF. The uncertainty of yields due to the scale dependence as evaluated in [10] is about a factor of 2. Bars and boxes (bands) represent statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively.

The invariant yields $d^2N/(2\pi p_T dp_T dy)$ of $K^0_S$ in central Au+Au collisions, and NLO calculations with AKK [9] and DSS [10] FF. The uncertainty of yields due to the scale dependence as evaluated in [10] is about a factor of 2. Bars and boxes (bands) represent statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively.

Yield ratios $\pi^−/\pi^+$, $\bar{p}/p$, $K^−/K^+$, $p/\pi^+$, $\bar{p}/\pi^−$, and $K^{\pm}/\pi^{\pm}$ versus $p_T$ in p+p collisions, and nominal NLO calculations with AKK [9] and DSS [10] FFs without theoretical uncertainties. Bars and boxes (bands) represent statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively.

Yield ratio $K^0_S$)/$\pi^{\pm}$ versus $p_T$ in p+p collisions, and nominal NLO calculations with AKK [9] and DSS [10] FFs without theoretical uncertainties. Bars and boxes (bands) represent statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively.

Yield ratios $p/\pi^+$ and $\bar{p}/\pi^−$ versus $p_T$ in central Au+Au collisions [14] with updated uncertainties at high $p_T$. Bars and boxes (bands) represent statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively.

$R_{AA}$ of $\pi^{\pm} in central Au+Au collisions as a function of $p_T$. Bars and boxes (bands) represent statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively. The height of the band at unity represents the normalization uncertainty.

$R_{AA}$ of $K^{\pm}+p(\bar{p})$ in central Au+Au collisions as a function of $p_T$. Bars and boxes (bands) represent statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively. The height of the band at unity represents the normalization uncertainty.

$R_{AA}$ of $K^0_S$ in central Au+Au collisions as a function of $p_T$. The curves are the calculations for $K^0_S$ $R_{AA}$ with and without jet conversion in medium [15]. Bars and boxes (bands) represent statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively. The height of the band at unity represents the normalization uncertainty.

$R_{AA}$ of $\rho^0$ in central Au+Au collisions as a function of $p_T$. Bars and boxes (bands) represent statistical and systematic uncertainties, respectively. The height of the band at unity represents the normalization uncertainty.

The ratios of $R_{AA}[K^{\pm} + p(\bar{p})]$ to $R_{AA}(\pi^{\pm})$. The boxes and shaded bands represent the systematic uncertainties for $R_{AA}[K^{\pm} +p(\bar{p})]/R_{AA}(\pi^{\pm})$, respectively.

The ratios of $R_{AA}(K^− + \bar{p})$ to $R_{AA}(K^+ p)$. The systematic uncertainties for $R_{AA}(K^− + \bar{p})/R_{AA}(K^+ +p)$ are 2–12% and left off for clarity.

The ratios of $R_{AA}[\rho^0]$ to $R_{AA}(\pi^{\pm})$. The boxes and shaded bands represent the systematic uncertainties for $R_{AA}(\rho^0)/R_{AA}(\pi^{\pm})$, respectively.

Observed and predicted jet multiplicity distribution for jets with PT > 55 Gev in the ET(C=MISSING)/SQRT(HT) region 2-3 GeV.

Observed and predicted jet multiplicity distribution for jets with PT > 80 Gev in the ET(C=MISSING)/SQRT(HT) region 1.5-2 GeV.

Observed and predicted jet multiplicity distribution for jets with PT > 80 Gev in the ET(C=MISSING)/SQRT(HT) region 2-3 GeV.

Observed and predicted jet multiplicity distribution for jets with PT > 55 Gev in the Top Control Region.

Observed and predicted jet multiplicity distribution for jets with PT > 80 Gev in the Top Control Region.

Observed and predicted jet multiplicity distribution for jets with PT > 55 Gev in the W Control Region.

Observed and predicted jet multiplicity distribution for jets with PT > 80 Gev in the W Control Region.

Observed and predicted jet multiplicity distribution for jets with PT > 55 Gev in the Z Control Region.

Observed and predicted jet multiplicity distribution for jets with PT > 80 Gev in the Z Control Region.

Observed and predicted distributions of the variable ET(C=MISSING)/SQRT(HT) for events with 7 ot more jets each having PT > 55 GeV.

Observed and predicted distributions of the variable ET(C=MISSING)/SQRT(HT) for events with 6 ot more jets each having PT > 80 GeV.

Observed and predicted distributions of the variable ET(C=MISSING)/SQRT(HT) for events with 8 ot more jets each having PT > 55 GeV.

Observed and predicted distributions of the variable ET(C=MISSING)/SQRT(HT) for events with 7 ot more jets each having PT > 80 GeV.

Observed and predicted jet multiplicity distribution for jets with PT > 55 Gev in the ET(C=MISSING)/SQRT(HT) region > 3 GeV.

Observed and predicted jet multiplicity distribution for jets with PT > 80 Gev in the ET(C=MISSING)/SQRT(HT) region > 3 GeV.

Observed and predicted missing ET distributions.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the sneutrino cross section times its e-mu branching ratio.

Observed 95% CL upper limits on the zprime cross section times its e-mu branching ratio.

95% CL upper limits on lambdaprime_311 coupling as a function of the sneutrino mass for three values of lamdba_312.

RPV sneutrino signal selection efficiency as a function of the sneutrino mass.

The Zprime signal selection efficiency as a function of the Zprime mass.

Charged particle fragmentation function in the jet-Pt range 80 TO 110 GeV.

Charged particle fragmentation function in the jet-Pt range 110 TO 160 GeV.

Charged particle fragmentation function in the jet-Pt range 160 TO 210 GeV.

Charged particle fragmentation function in the jet-Pt range 210 TO 260 GeV.

Charged particle fragmentation function in the jet-Pt range 260 TO 310 GeV.

Charged particle fragmentation function in the jet-Pt range 310 TO 400 GeV.

Charged particle fragmentation function in the jet-Pt range 400 TO 500 GeV.

Charged particle Rho distribution in the jet-Pt range 25 TO 40 GeV.

Charged particle Rho distribution in the jet-Pt range 40 TO 60 GeV.

Charged particle Rho distribution in the jet-Pt range 60 TO 80 GeV.

Charged particle Rho distribution in the jet-Pt range 80 TO 110 GeV.

Charged particle Rho distribution in the jet-Pt range 110 TO 160 GeV.

Charged particle Rho distribution in the jet-Pt range 160 TO 210 GeV.

Charged particle Rho distribution in the jet-Pt range 210 TO 260 GeV.

Charged particle Rho distribution in the jet-Pt range 260 TO 310 GeV.

Charged particle Rho distribution in the jet-Pt range 310 TO 400 GeV.

Charged particle Rho distribution in the jet-Pt range 400 TO 500 GeV.

Charged particle ptRel distribution in the jet-Pt range 25 TO 40 GeV.

Charged particle ptRel distribution in the jet-Pt range 40 TO 60 GeV.

Charged particle ptRel distribution in the jet-Pt range 60 TO 80 GeV.

Charged particle ptRel distribution in the jet-Pt range 80 TO 110 GeV.

Charged particle ptRel distribution in the jet-Pt range 110 TO 160 GeV.

Charged particle ptRel distribution in the jet-Pt range 160 TO 210 GeV.

Charged particle ptRel distribution in the jet-Pt range 210 TO 260 GeV.

Charged particle ptRel distribution in the jet-Pt range 260 TO 310 GeV.

Charged particle ptRel distribution in the jet-Pt range 310 TO 400 GeV.

Charged particle ptRel distribution in the jet-Pt range 400 TO 500 GeV.

Efficiency as a function of the radial vertex position for displaced vertices in the signal MC sample MH, with squark mass 700 GeV and neutralino mass 494 GeV, in events that pass the trigger and primary vertex cuts and also requiring the reconstructed vertex to have at least 4 tracks, an invariant mass > 10 GeV and radial distance from the primary vertex > 4mm, and the event to contain a reconstructed muon with pT > 45 GeV.

Efficiency as a function of the radial vertex position for displaced vertices in the signal MC sample ML, with squark mass 700 GeV and neutralino mass 108 GeV, in events that pass the trigger and primary vertex cuts.

Efficiency as a function of the radial vertex position for displaced vertices in the signal MC sample ML, with squark mass 700 GeV and neutralino mass 108 GeV, in events that pass the trigger and primary vertex cuts and also requiring the reconstructed displaced vertex to have at least 4 tracks, an invariant mass > 10 GeV and radial distance from the primary vertex > 4mm.

Efficiency as a function of the radial vertex position for displaced vertices in the signal MC sample ML, with squark mass 700 GeV and neutralino mass 108 GeV, in events that pass the trigger and primary vertex cuts and also requiring the reconstructed vertex to have at least 4 tracks, an invariant mass > 10 GeV and radial distance from the primary vertex > 4mm, and the event to contain a reconstructed muon with pT > 45 GeV.

The invariant mass of reconstructed displaced vertices in the data after the trigger and muon requirements, and the background MC estimate scaled to the integrated luminosity of the data.

The distribution of numbner of tracks in reconstructed displaced vertices in the data after the trigger and muon requirements, and the background MC estimate scaled to the integrated luminosity of the data.

The distribution of radial position of reconstructed displaced vertices in the data after the trigger and muon requirements, and the background MC estimate scaled to the integrated luminosity of the data.

Inclusive muon cross section from W+->mu+nu simulated with MC with CTEQ6.6 pdf set for |eta| < 2.5 and pT > 4 GeV: the error shown is due to the MC statistics.

Inclusive muon cross section from W-->mu-nu simulated with MC with CTEQ6.6 pdf set for |eta| < 2.5 and pT > 4 GeV: the error shown is due to the MC statistics.

Inclusive muon cross section from Z->mu+mu- simulated with MC with CTEQ6.6 pdf set for |eta| < 2.5 and pT > 4 GeV (the Z is defined as Z/gamma* with m_ll > 60 GeV): the error shown is due to the MC statistics.

Inclusive muon cross section from backgrounds: Z->tau tau, ttbar, Drell-Yan->mu+mu- (Drell-Yan is defined as Z/gamma* with m_ll < 60 GeV) simulated with Pythia with MRSTLO* pdf set for |eta| < 2.5 and pT > 4 GeV: the error shown is due to the MC statistics.

Inclusive muon cross section from bbar+ccbar production and decays simulated with FONLL with CTEQ6.6 pdf set for |eta| < 2.5 and pT > 4 GeV: the error shown is the uncertainty due to scale variation, alpha_s+pdf using CTEQ6.6 error set and the heavy quark masses.

Inclusive muon cross section from bbar+ccbar simulated with FONLL removing the resummation term with CTEQ6.6 pdf set for |eta| < 2.5 and pT > 4 GeV?.

Inclusive muon cross section for |eta| < 2.0 excluding 1.37 < |eta| < 1.52 and pT > 4 GeV: (stat) statistical error, (sys) systematic error. The first systematic error is the intrinsic error of the measurement, the second is the error due to the luminosity.

Inclusive muon cross section after subtraction of W,Z, Drell-Yan and top background for |eta| < 2.0 excluding 1.37 < |eta| < 1.52 and pT > 4 GeV: (stat): statistical error, (sys): systematic error. The first systematic error is the intrinsic error of the measurement, the second the error due to the luminosity, the third is due to the subtraction of the background and is dominated by the error on the W, Z inclusive cross sections.

Inclusive muon cross section from W+->mu+nu simulated with MC with CTEQ6.6 pdf set for |eta| < 2.0 excluding 1.37 < |eta| < 1.52 and pT > 4 GeV: the error shown is due to the MC statistics.

Inclusive muon cross section from W-->mu-nu simulated with MC with CTEQ6.6 pdf set for |eta| < 2.0 excluding 1.37 < |eta| < 1.52 and pT > 4 GeV: the error shown is due to the MC statistics.

Inclusive muon cross section from Z->mu+mu- simulated with MC with CTEQ6.6 pdf set for |eta| < 2.0 excluding 1.37 < |eta| < 1.52 and pT > 4 GeV (the Z is defined as Z/gamma* with m_ll > 60 GeV): the error shown is due to the MC statistics.

Inclusive muon cross section from backgrounds: Z->tau tau, ttbar, Drell-Yan->mu+mu- (Drell-Yan is defined as Z/gamma* with m_ll < 60 GeV) simulated with Pythia with MRSTLO* pdf set for |eta| < 2.0 excluding 1.37 < |eta| < 1.52 and pT > 4 GeV: the error shown is due to the MC statistics.

Inclusive muon cross section from bbar+ccbar production and decays simulated with FONLL with CTEQ6.6 pdf set for |eta| < 2.0 excluding 1.37 < |eta| < 1.52 and pT > 4 GeV: the error shown is the uncertainty due to scale variation, alpha_s+pdf using CTEQ6.6 error set and the heavy quark masses.

Inclusive muon cross section from bbar+ccbar simulated with FONLL removing the resummation term with CTEQ6.6 pdf set for |eta| < 2.0 excluding 1.37 < |eta| < 1.52 and pT > 4 GeV.

FIG. 1. (Color online) Perspective views of $2 \mathrm{D}$ charge-independent angular correlations $\Delta \rho / \sqrt{\rho_{\mathrm{ref}}}$ on $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ for Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=200$ and $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ (top and bottom rows, respectively). Centrality increases left to right from most peripheral to most central. Corrected total cross-section fractions are (left to right) $84 \%-93 \%, 55 \%-64 \%, 18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $200-\mathrm{GeV}$ data and $84 \%-95 \%, 56 \%-65 \%$ $18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ data (see Tables III and IV).

FIG. 1. (Color online) Perspective views of $2 \mathrm{D}$ charge-independent angular correlations $\Delta \rho / \sqrt{\rho_{\mathrm{ref}}}$ on $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ for Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=200$ and $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ (top and bottom rows, respectively). Centrality increases left to right from most peripheral to most central. Corrected total cross-section fractions are (left to right) $84 \%-93 \%, 55 \%-64 \%, 18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $200-\mathrm{GeV}$ data and $84 \%-95 \%, 56 \%-65 \%$ $18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ data (see Tables III and IV).

FIG. 1. (Color online) Perspective views of $2 \mathrm{D}$ charge-independent angular correlations $\Delta \rho / \sqrt{\rho_{\mathrm{ref}}}$ on $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ for Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=200$ and $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ (top and bottom rows, respectively). Centrality increases left to right from most peripheral to most central. Corrected total cross-section fractions are (left to right) $84 \%-93 \%, 55 \%-64 \%, 18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $200-\mathrm{GeV}$ data and $84 \%-95 \%, 56 \%-65 \%$ $18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ data (see Tables III and IV).

FIG. 1. (Color online) Perspective views of $2 \mathrm{D}$ charge-independent angular correlations $\Delta \rho / \sqrt{\rho_{\mathrm{ref}}}$ on $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ for Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=200$ and $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ (top and bottom rows, respectively). Centrality increases left to right from most peripheral to most central. Corrected total cross-section fractions are (left to right) $84 \%-93 \%, 55 \%-64 \%, 18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $200-\mathrm{GeV}$ data and $84 \%-95 \%, 56 \%-65 \%$ $18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ data (see Tables III and IV).

FIG. 1. (Color online) Perspective views of $2 \mathrm{D}$ charge-independent angular correlations $\Delta \rho / \sqrt{\rho_{\mathrm{ref}}}$ on $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ for Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=200$ and $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ (top and bottom rows, respectively). Centrality increases left to right from most peripheral to most central. Corrected total cross-section fractions are (left to right) $84 \%-93 \%, 55 \%-64 \%, 18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $200-\mathrm{GeV}$ data and $84 \%-95 \%, 56 \%-65 \%$ $18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ data (see Tables III and IV).

FIG. 2. (Color online) Fit decomposition of the $46 \%-56 \%$ centrality data for 62 -GeV Au-Au collisions. The top panels show from left to right the corrected data, model fit, fit residuals (data - model), and same-side 2D Gaussian. The bottom panels similarly show the away-side azimuth dipole, the nonjet azimuth quadrupole, the 1D $\eta_{\Delta}$ Gaussian, and the 2D exponential. This centrality is just below the sharp transition at $v_{\text {trans }}=3$. Fit residuals (c) are scaled up eightfold relative to the data.

FIG. 3. Fit parameters for $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ correlation data from Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=62$ (open symbols) and 200 GeV (solid symbols) versus centrality measure $\nu$ computed at fixed energy $(200 \mathrm{GeV})$. The SS $2 \mathrm{D}$ Gaussian amplitudes, $\eta_{\Delta}$ widths, and $\phi_{\Delta}$ widths are shown in the left, center, and right panels, respectively of the top row. The bottom row shows from left to right the amplitudes for the dipole, quadrupole, and SS peak width aspect ratio $\sigma_{\eta_{\Delta}} / \sigma_{\phi_{\Delta}} .$ Fitting errors are indicated by error bars where larger than the symbols. Solid lines connect the points for clarity. The dotted and dashed curves indicate Glauber linear superposition estimates for 62 - and 200 -GeV peak amplitudes respectively, as discussed in the text. The quadrupole data are consistent with Ref. [60]. The hatched regions indicate the full range of systematic uncertainties listed in Appendix F. The vertical dark bands indicate estimated $v$ equivalents for $N-N$ collisions and $b=0$ Au-Au collisions.

FIG. 3. Fit parameters for $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ correlation data from Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=62$ (open symbols) and 200 GeV (solid symbols) versus centrality measure $\nu$ computed at fixed energy $(200 \mathrm{GeV})$. The SS $2 \mathrm{D}$ Gaussian amplitudes, $\eta_{\Delta}$ widths, and $\phi_{\Delta}$ widths are shown in the left, center, and right panels, respectively of the top row. The bottom row shows from left to right the amplitudes for the dipole, quadrupole, and SS peak width aspect ratio $\sigma_{\eta_{\Delta}} / \sigma_{\phi_{\Delta}} .$ Fitting errors are indicated by error bars where larger than the symbols. Solid lines connect the points for clarity. The dotted and dashed curves indicate Glauber linear superposition estimates for 62 - and 200 -GeV peak amplitudes respectively, as discussed in the text. The quadrupole data are consistent with Ref. [60]. The hatched regions indicate the full range of systematic uncertainties listed in Appendix F. The vertical dark bands indicate estimated $v$ equivalents for $N-N$ collisions and $b=0$ Au-Au collisions.

FIG. 3. Fit parameters for $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ correlation data from Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=62$ (open symbols) and 200 GeV (solid symbols) versus centrality measure $\nu$ computed at fixed energy $(200 \mathrm{GeV})$. The SS $2 \mathrm{D}$ Gaussian amplitudes, $\eta_{\Delta}$ widths, and $\phi_{\Delta}$ widths are shown in the left, center, and right panels, respectively of the top row. The bottom row shows from left to right the amplitudes for the dipole, quadrupole, and SS peak width aspect ratio $\sigma_{\eta_{\Delta}} / \sigma_{\phi_{\Delta}} .$ Fitting errors are indicated by error bars where larger than the symbols. Solid lines connect the points for clarity. The dotted and dashed curves indicate Glauber linear superposition estimates for 62 - and 200 -GeV peak amplitudes respectively, as discussed in the text. The quadrupole data are consistent with Ref. [60]. The hatched regions indicate the full range of systematic uncertainties listed in Appendix F. The vertical dark bands indicate estimated $v$ equivalents for $N-N$ collisions and $b=0$ Au-Au collisions.

FIG. 3. Fit parameters for $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ correlation data from Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=62$ (open symbols) and 200 GeV (solid symbols) versus centrality measure $\nu$ computed at fixed energy $(200 \mathrm{GeV})$. The SS $2 \mathrm{D}$ Gaussian amplitudes, $\eta_{\Delta}$ widths, and $\phi_{\Delta}$ widths are shown in the left, center, and right panels, respectively of the top row. The bottom row shows from left to right the amplitudes for the dipole, quadrupole, and SS peak width aspect ratio $\sigma_{\eta_{\Delta}} / \sigma_{\phi_{\Delta}} .$ Fitting errors are indicated by error bars where larger than the symbols. Solid lines connect the points for clarity. The dotted and dashed curves indicate Glauber linear superposition estimates for 62 - and 200 -GeV peak amplitudes respectively, as discussed in the text. The quadrupole data are consistent with Ref. [60]. The hatched regions indicate the full range of systematic uncertainties listed in Appendix F. The vertical dark bands indicate estimated $v$ equivalents for $N-N$ collisions and $b=0$ Au-Au collisions.

FIG. 3. Fit parameters for $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ correlation data from Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=62$ (open symbols) and 200 GeV (solid symbols) versus centrality measure $\nu$ computed at fixed energy $(200 \mathrm{GeV})$. The SS $2 \mathrm{D}$ Gaussian amplitudes, $\eta_{\Delta}$ widths, and $\phi_{\Delta}$ widths are shown in the left, center, and right panels, respectively of the top row. The bottom row shows from left to right the amplitudes for the dipole, quadrupole, and SS peak width aspect ratio $\sigma_{\eta_{\Delta}} / \sigma_{\phi_{\Delta}} .$ Fitting errors are indicated by error bars where larger than the symbols. Solid lines connect the points for clarity. The dotted and dashed curves indicate Glauber linear superposition estimates for 62 - and 200 -GeV peak amplitudes respectively, as discussed in the text. The quadrupole data are consistent with Ref. [60]. The hatched regions indicate the full range of systematic uncertainties listed in Appendix F. The vertical dark bands indicate estimated $v$ equivalents for $N-N$ collisions and $b=0$ Au-Au collisions.

FIG. 3. Fit parameters for $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ correlation data from Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=62$ (open symbols) and 200 GeV (solid symbols) versus centrality measure $\nu$ computed at fixed energy $(200 \mathrm{GeV})$. The SS $2 \mathrm{D}$ Gaussian amplitudes, $\eta_{\Delta}$ widths, and $\phi_{\Delta}$ widths are shown in the left, center, and right panels, respectively of the top row. The bottom row shows from left to right the amplitudes for the dipole, quadrupole, and SS peak width aspect ratio $\sigma_{\eta_{\Delta}} / \sigma_{\phi_{\Delta}} .$ Fitting errors are indicated by error bars where larger than the symbols. Solid lines connect the points for clarity. The dotted and dashed curves indicate Glauber linear superposition estimates for 62 - and 200 -GeV peak amplitudes respectively, as discussed in the text. The quadrupole data are consistent with Ref. [60]. The hatched regions indicate the full range of systematic uncertainties listed in Appendix F. The vertical dark bands indicate estimated $v$ equivalents for $N-N$ collisions and $b=0$ Au-Au collisions.

FIG. 4. (Color online) (a) 2D data histogram from $0 \%-5 \%$ central 200 GeV Au-Au collisions $[(0,0)$ bin suppressed]. (b) Additional model component fitted to the $2 \mathrm{D}$ histogram and consisting of an AS azimuth dipole modulated by function $F\left(\eta_{\Delta}\right)$ described in the text. (c) Fit residuals including the new model component. (d) Data histogram in the first panel minus the additional model component and fitted offset. Remaining structure is described accurately by an AS dipole and SS 2D Gaussian.

FIG. 9. (a) Amplitude of SS 2D peak (jet-correlated pairs per final-state hadron) for data (solid points), GLS extrapolation from $p$ - $p$ data (dashed curve) and from the HIJING Monte Carlo (open points, dotted curve). (b) Single-particle production extrapolated from $p-p$ data (dashed curve, GLS), and from more-central Au-Au data (solid line) and HIJING (dash-dotted line, open points). (c) Single-particle hard-component production per $N-N$ binary collision from $p-p$ data, from more-central Au-Au data and from HIJING (open points). (d) Jet-correlated pair production (SS 2D peak) per $N-N$ binary collision extrapolated from $p-p$ data (GLS), and from Au-Au data (solid points) and HIJING (open points).

FIG. 9. (a) Amplitude of SS 2D peak (jet-correlated pairs per final-state hadron) for data (solid points), GLS extrapolation from $p$ - $p$ data (dashed curve) and from the HIJING Monte Carlo (open points, dotted curve). (b) Single-particle production extrapolated from $p-p$ data (dashed curve, GLS), and from more-central Au-Au data (solid line) and HIJING (dash-dotted line, open points). (c) Single-particle hard-component production per $N-N$ binary collision from $p-p$ data, from more-central Au-Au data and from HIJING (open points). (d) Jet-correlated pair production (SS 2D peak) per $N-N$ binary collision extrapolated from $p-p$ data (GLS), and from Au-Au data (solid points) and HIJING (open points).

FIG. 9. (a) Amplitude of SS 2D peak (jet-correlated pairs per final-state hadron) for data (solid points), GLS extrapolation from $p$ - $p$ data (dashed curve) and from the HIJING Monte Carlo (open points, dotted curve). (b) Single-particle production extrapolated from $p-p$ data (dashed curve, GLS), and from more-central Au-Au data (solid line) and HIJING (dash-dotted line, open points). (c) Single-particle hard-component production per $N-N$ binary collision from $p-p$ data, from more-central Au-Au data and from HIJING (open points). (d) Jet-correlated pair production (SS 2D peak) per $N-N$ binary collision extrapolated from $p-p$ data (GLS), and from Au-Au data (solid points) and HIJING (open points).

FIG. 9. (a) Amplitude of SS 2D peak (jet-correlated pairs per final-state hadron) for data (solid points), GLS extrapolation from $p$ - $p$ data (dashed curve) and from the HIJING Monte Carlo (open points, dotted curve). (b) Single-particle production extrapolated from $p-p$ data (dashed curve, GLS), and from more-central Au-Au data (solid line) and HIJING (dash-dotted line, open points). (c) Single-particle hard-component production per $N-N$ binary collision from $p-p$ data, from more-central Au-Au data and from HIJING (open points). (d) Jet-correlated pair production (SS 2D peak) per $N-N$ binary collision extrapolated from $p-p$ data (GLS), and from Au-Au data (solid points) and HIJING (open points).

FIG. 11. (Color online) (Left) Uncorrected angular correlations from 62-GeV $37 \%-46 \%$ central Au-Au collisions showing pileup distortions, especially evident as the W-shaped nonuniformity of the AS ridge on $\eta_{\Delta}$. (Right) The same data with pileup correction applied.

Elliptic flow versus $p_{T}$ for charged hadrons from Cu+Cu collisions at 0–60% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 22.4 GeV measured with the subevent method with a pseudorapidity gap of 0.3 units compared with previously published STAR results for 200 and 62.4 GeV Cu+Cu [27] measured with full TPC event plane method $v_{2}${TPC} and full FTPC event plane method $v_{2}${FTPC}. The error bars are statistical. Results are also compared to $v_{2}$($p_{T}$) model calculations.

Elliptic flow $v_{2}(\eta)$ for charged hadrons fromCu+Cu collisions at 0–60% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 22.4 GeV. The present STAR results are compared to the measurement from the PHOBOS [29] collaboration for Cu+Cu at 22.4 GeV. The PHOBOS results include statistical and systematic errors whereas the STAR results are plotted with statistical uncertainties only, and systematic errors are discussed in Section III C. Results are also compared to $v_{2}(\eta)$ calculations from the indicated models.

Elliptic flow $v_{2}${TPC} and $v_{2}${4} as a function of centrality for charged hadrons from Cu+Cu collisions at 0 − 60% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 22.4 GeV, compared with previously published results from the STAR collaboration at 200 GeV and 62.4 GeV.

The distribution in Meff for the higher jet Pt cut (> 80 GeV) (scalar sum of the missing transverse momentum and the transverse momenta of all jets with pT > 40 GeV) for events with at least 4 jets after the application of all selection criteria (other than the Meff cut itself). The table shows the number of observed data points per 100 GeV bin plus the background prediction of the Standard-Model Monte-Carlo and its upper and lower 1-sigma error limits uncertainty band.

95% CL exclusion limit in the (Mgluino,Msquark) plane for the simplified model described in the paper. The gluino mass and the masses of the squarks of the first two generations are set to the values shown. The lightest neutralino is assigned mass of zero. All other supersymmetric particles, including the squarks of the third generation, are decoupled by being given masses of 5 TeV.

95% CL exclusion limit in the Squark-Gluino model, as in the previous table, but for a lightest neutralino assigned mass of 195 GeV.

95% CL exclusion limit in the Squark-Gluino model, as in the previous table, but for a lightest neutralino assigned mass of 395 GeV.

95% CL exclusion limit in M(0) and M(1/2) in the tan(beta)=10, A0=0, MU>0 slice of MSUGRA/CMSSM.

95% CL exclusion limit in the Universal Extra Dimensions model in 1/R v Lambda*R space.

95% CL exclusion limit in the Universal Extra Dimensions model in m_{g_KK} vs (m_{g_KK}-m_{gamma_KK}) space.