Total $J/\psi$ efficiency as a function of cos$\theta$ for $2 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 3$ GeV/c

Total $J/\psi$ efficiency as a function of cos$\theta$ for $3 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 4$ GeV/c

Total $J/\psi$ efficiency as a function of cos$\theta$ for $4 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 6$ GeV/c

Different contributions to total $J/\psi$ efficiency as a function of cos$\theta$ for $2 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 3$ GeV/c

Different contributions to total $J/\psi$ efficiency as a function of cos$\theta$ for $3 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 4$ GeV/c

Different contributions to total $J/\psi$ efficiency as a function of cos$\theta$ for $4 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 6$ GeV/c

Corrected cos$\theta$ distribution for $2 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 3$ GeV/c

Corrected cos$\theta$ distribution for $3 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 4$ GeV/c

Corrected cos$\theta$ distribution for $4 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 6$ GeV/c

$J/\psi$ polarization parameter $\lambda_{\theta}$ as a function of $J/\psi$ $p_{T}$ for rapidity |y|<1

The invariant yield versus transverse momentum for |y| < 1 in 0-60% centrality in Au+Au collisions (solid circles). The results are compared to high-$p_T$ (3 < $p_T$ < 10 GeV/c) results from STAR [9] (solid squares) and PHENIX data [8] (open squares). Also shown is the yield in 0-60% centrality Cu+Cu collisions for low $p_T$ (solid triangles) and high $p_T$ [48] (open triangles). The models are described in the text [49, 50]. The $J/\psi$ cross section in p+p collisions is also shown at STAR (stars) and PHENIX [51] (diamonds), and the scale is indicated on the right axis.

The $J/\psi$ nuclear modification factor versus transverse momentum for |y| < 1 and $p_T$ < 5 GeV/c for 0-60% centrality Au+Au collisions (solid circles). The data are compared with STAR high-$p_T$ (5 < $p_T$ < 10 GeV/c) results [9] and PHENIX results [8] in |y| < 0.35 (open squares). The statistical and systematic uncertainties on the baseline $J/\psi$ cross section in p+p collisions are indicated by the hatched and solid bands, respectively. Boxes on the vertical axes represent the uncertainty on $N_{coll}$ combined with the uncertainty on the inelastic cross section in p+p collisions

The $J/\psi$ nuclear modification factor versus transverse momentum for |y| < 1 and $p_T$ < 5 GeV/c for 0-20% centrality Au+Au collisions (solid circles). The data are compared with STAR high-$p_T$ (5 < $p_T$ < 10 GeV/c) results [9] and PHENIX results [8] in |y| < 0.35 (open squares). The statistical and systematic uncertainties on the baseline $J/\psi$ cross section in p+p collisions are indicated by the hatched and solid bands, respectively. Boxes on the vertical axes represent the uncertainty on $N_{coll}$ combined with the uncertainty on the inelastic cross section in p+p collisions

The $J/\psi$ nuclear modification factor versus transverse momentum for |y| < 1 and $p_T$ < 5 GeV/c for 20-40% centrality Au+Au collisions (solid circles). The data are compared with STAR high-$p_T$ (5 < $p_T$ < 10 GeV/c) results [9] and PHENIX results [8] in |y| < 0.35 (open squares). The statistical and systematic uncertainties on the baseline $J/\psi$ cross section in p+p collisions are indicated by the hatched and solid bands, respectively. Boxes on the vertical axes represent the uncertainty on $N_{coll}$ combined with the uncertainty on the inelastic cross section in p+p collisions

The $J/\psi$ nuclear modification factor versus transverse momentum for |y| < 1 and $p_T$ < 5 GeV/c for 40-60% centrality Au+Au collisions (solid circles). The data are compared with STAR high-$p_T$ (5 < $p_T$ < 10 GeV/c) results [9] and PHENIX results [8] in |y| < 0.35 (open squares). The statistical and systematic uncertainties on the baseline $J/\psi$ cross section in p+p collisions are indicated by the hatched and solid bands, respectively. Boxes on the vertical axes represent the uncertainty on $N_{coll}$ combined with the uncertainty on the inelastic cross section in p+p collisions

The $J/\psi$ invariant yield and nuclear modification factor as a function of centrality for |y| < 1 in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

The $J/\psi$ invariant yield $Bd^2N/(2\pi p_Tdydp_T) [(GeV/c)^{-2}]$ and nuclear modification factor as a function of transverse momentum for |y| < 1 in Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

The $J/\psi$ invariant yield and nuclear modification factor for |y| < 1 in Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

$\rho^0$ production cross section determined with the data set collected with trigger B, as a function of momentum transfer $t$, fitted with a double exponential fit function in the range $t < 0.1$. The statistical errors are shown. The ratio of incoherent to coherent cross sections is measured to be $0.20 \pm 0.8$. The fit parameters are shown in Table I.

Comparison of theoretical predictions to the measured total cross section for coherent $\rho^0$ production as a functionof $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ . The measured cross section is based on the dataset collected with trigger B. The error bars show the sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties. See text for details.

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.

The angle Delta between the away-side peaks and DeltaPhi = pi for 4 < pT_trig < 6 GeV/c in 0-12% central Au+Au collisions as a function of pT_assoc . Three different parametrisations of the away-side peak shape were used. The errors are statistical errors from the fit.

Near-side (|dphi| < 0.9) associated yield per trigger particle for various trigger particle pT selections as a function of associated pT . Results are shown for 0-12% central Au+Au collisions and for d+Au collisions.

Near-side (|dphi| < 0.9) ratios of the per-trigger associated yields in central Au+Au and d+Au collisions.

Away-side (|dphi| > 0.9) associated yield per trigger particle for various trigger particle pT selections as a function of associated pT . Results are shown for 0-12% central Au+Au collisions and for d+Au collisions.

Away-side (|dphi| > 0.9) ratios of the per-trigger associated yields in central Au+Au and d+Au collisions.

Mean transverse momentum <pT> of associated particles with 0.25 < pT,assoc < 4.0 GeV/c, for four different centrality selections.

Mean transverse momentum <pT> (DeltaPhi) of associated hadrons in the range 0.25 < pT_assoc < 4.0 GeV/c in the core (|DeltaPhi − pi| < pi/6) and cone (pi/6 < |DeltaPhi − pi| < pi/2) azimuthal regions for 3 < pT_trig < 4 GeV/c and 4 < pT_trig < 6 GeV/c as a function of number of participants. The inclusive <pT> in the same pT range for events with a trigger hadron is also indicated.

The balance function in terms of $\Delta y$ for identified charged pion pairs from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV for nine centrality bins.

The balance function in terms of $\Delta y$ for identified charged kaon pairs from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV for nine centrality bins.

The balance function for p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. The top panel shows the balance function for all charged particles in terms of $\Delta \eta$. The bottom panel gives the balance function for charged pion pairs and charged kaon pairs in terms of $\Delta y$.

The balance function for p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. The top panel shows the balance function for all charged particles in terms of $\Delta \eta$. The bottom panel gives the balance function for charged pion pairs and charged kaon pairs in terms of $\Delta y$.

The balance function in terms of $\Delta \eta$ for all charged particles from d+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV for three centrality bins.

The balance function in terms of $q_{inv}$ for charged pion pairs from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV in nine centrality bins. Curves correspond to a thermal distribution (Eq. 3) plus $K^{0}_{S}$ decay.

The balance function in terms of $q_{inv}$ for charged-pion pairs in two centrality bins over the range 0 < $q_{inv}$ < 0.2 GeV/c.

The balance function in terms of $q_{inv}$ for charged kaon pairs from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV in nine centrality bins. Curves correspond to a thermal (Eq. 3) distribution plus $\phi$ decay.

The balance function in terms of $q_{inv}$ for charged pion pairs [part a)] and charged kaon pairs [part b)] from p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV integrated over all multiplicities. Solid curves correspond to a thermal distribution (Eq. 3) plus $K^{0}_{S}$ and $\rho^{0}$ decay for pions and φ decay for kaons. The dashed curve for pions represents a fit to a thermal distribution (Eq. 3) plus $K^{0}_{S}$ decay and $\rho^{0}$ decay, with the $\rho^{0}$ mass shifted down by 0.04 $GeV/c^{2}$.

The balance function in terms of $q_{long}$ for charged pion pairs from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV in nine centrality bins.

The balance function in terms of $q_{out}$ for charged pion pairs from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV in nine centrality bins.

(Color online) The balance function in terms of $q_{side}$ for charged pion pairs from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV for nine centrality bins.

(Color online) The balance function in terms of $\Delta\phi$ for all charged particles with 0.2< pt<2.0 GeV/c from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV in nine centrality bins.The closed circles represent the real data minus the mixed events.

(Color online) The balance function in terms of $\Delta\phi$ for all charged particles with 1.0< pt<10.0 GeV/c from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV in nine centrality bins.The closed circles represent the real data minus the mixed events.

(Color online) The balance function in terms of $\Delta y$ for charged pions from central collisions of Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV compared with predictions from the blast-wave model from Ref.[30] and filtered HIJING calculations taking into account acceptance and efficiency.

(Color online) The balance function in terms of $\Delta y$ for charged pions from central collisions of Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV compared with predictions from the blast-wave model from Ref.[30] and filtered HIJING calculations taking into account acceptance and efficiency.

(Color online) The balance function in terms of $q_{inv}$ for charged pions from central collisions of Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV compared with predictions from the blast-wave model from Ref.[30] and predictions from filtered HIJING calculations including acceptance and efficiency. For the blast-wave calculations, HBT is not included and the decays of the $K^0_S$ and $\rho^0$ are not shown.

(Color online) The balance function in terms of $q_{inv}$ for charged pions from central collisions of Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV compared with predictions from the blast-wave model from Ref.[30] and predictions from filtered HIJING calculations including acceptance and efficiency. For the blast-wave calculations, HBT is not included and the decays of the $K^0_S$ and $\rho^0$ are not shown.

(Color online) The balance function width $<\Delta\eta>$ for all charged particles from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV compared with the widths of balance functions calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are the balance function widths for p+p and d+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.Filtered HIJING calculations are also shown for the widths of the balance function from p+p and Au+Au collisions. Filtered UrQMD calculations are shown for the widths of the balance function from Au+Au collisions.

(Color online) The balance function width $<\Delta\eta>$ for all charged particles from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV compared with the widths of balance functions calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are the balance function widths for p+p and d+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.Filtered HIJING calculations are also shown for the widths of the balance function from p+p and Au+Au collisions. Filtered UrQMD calculations are shown for the widths of the balance function from Au+Au collisions.

(Color online) The balance function widths for identified charged pions and charged kaons from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV and p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 200 GeV. Filtered HIJING calculations are shown for the same systems. Filtered UrQMD calculations are shown for Au+Au. Also shown is the width of the balance function for pions predicted by the blast-wave model of Ref.[30].

(Color online) The balance function width $\sigma$ extracted from $B(q_{inv})$ for identified charged pions and kaons from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV and p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 200 GeV using a thermal fit (Eq. 3) where $\sigma$ is the width. Filtered HIJING and UrQMD calculations are shown for pions and kaons from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. Values are shown for $\sqrt{2mT_{kin}}$ from Au+Au collisions, where m is the mass of a pion or a kaon, and $T_{kin}$ is calculated from identified particle spectra [45]. The width predicted by the blast-wave model of Ref. [30] is also shown for pions.

(Color online) The balance function width $\sigma$ extracted from $B(q_{inv})$ for identified charged pions and kaons from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV and p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 200 GeV using a thermal fit (Eq. 3) where $\sigma$ is the width. Filtered HIJING and UrQMD calculations are shown for pions and kaons from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. Values are shown for $\sqrt{2mT_{kin}}$ from Au+Au collisions, where m is the mass of a pion or a kaon, and $T_{kin}$ is calculated from identified particle spectra [45]. The width predicted by the blast-wave model of Ref. [30] is also shown for pions.

(Color online) The widths for the balance functions for pions in terms of $q_{long}$, $q_{out}$, and $q_{side}$ compared with UrQMD calculations.

(Color online) The weighted average cosine of the relative azimuthal angle,$<\cos(\Delta\phi)$, extracted from $B(\Delta\phi)$ for all charged particles with $0.2< p_t <2.0$ from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV and from all charged particleswith $1.0< p_t <10.0$ GeV/c, compared with predictions using filtered UrQMD calculations.

Identified particle (Kaon Plus) RCP for RHIC BES energies. The colored shaded boxes describe the point-to-point systematic uncertainties. The uncertainty bands at unity on the right side of the plot correspond to the pT -independent uncertainty in Ncoll scaling with the color in the band corresponding to the color of the data points for that energy.

Identified particle (Kaon Minus) RCP for RHIC BES energies. The colored shaded boxes describe the point-to-point systematic uncertainties. The uncertainty bands at unity on the right side of the plot correspond to the pT -independent uncertainty in Ncoll scaling with the color in the band corresponding to the color of the data points for that energy.

Identified particle (Proton) RCP for RHIC BES energies. The colored shaded boxes describe the point-to-point systematic uncertainties. The uncertainty bands at unity on the right side of the plot correspond to the pT -independent uncertainty in Ncoll scaling with the color in the band corresponding to the color of the data points for that energy.

Identified particle (Antiproton) RCP for RHIC BES energies. The colored shaded boxes describe the point-to-point systematic uncertainties. The uncertainty bands at unity on the right side of the plot correspond to the pT -independent uncertainty in Ncoll scaling with the color in the band corresponding to the color of the data points for that energy.

Charged hadron Y(<Npart>) for two ranges of pT (pT 3.0 - 3.5 GeV/c). Statistical uncertainty bars are included, mostly smaller than point size, as well as shaded bands to indicate systematic uncertainties.

Charged hadron Y(<Npart>) for two ranges of pT (pT 4.0 - 4.5 GeV/c). Statistical uncertainty bars are included, mostly smaller than point size, as well as shaded bands to indicate systematic uncertainties.

Glauber Fit Parameters

Nch at each Collision Energy (GeV)

Ncoll at each Collision Energy (GeV)

Npart at each Collision Energy (GeV)

The value of $\sigma^{NN}_{inel}$ used in the Monte Carlo Glauber simulation at each collision energy

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected mean (M) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected mean (M) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected mean (M) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected mean (M) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected standard deviation ($\sigma$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected standard deviation ($\sigma$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected standard deviation ($\sigma$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected standard deviation ($\sigma$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected standard deviation ($\sigma$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected standard deviation ($\sigma$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected standard deviation ($\sigma$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected skewness ($S$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected skewness ($S$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected skewness ($S$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected skewness ($S$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected skewness ($S$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected skewness ($S$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected skewness ($S$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected kurtosis ($\kappa$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected kurtosis ($\kappa$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected kurtosis ($\kappa$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected kurtosis ($\kappa$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected kurtosis ($\kappa$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected kurtosis ($\kappa$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected kurtosis ($\kappa$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $S\sigma$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $S\sigma$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $S\sigma$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $S\sigma$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $S\sigma$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $S\sigma$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $S\sigma$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\kappa\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\kappa\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\kappa\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\kappa\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\kappa\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\kappa\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\kappa\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\sigma^2/M$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of collision energy for Au+Au collisions. The error bars are statistical and the caps represent systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $S\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of collision energy for Au+Au collisions. The error bars are statistical and the caps represent systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\kappa\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of collision energy for Au+Au collisions. The error bars are statistical and the caps represent systematic errors.

Sample fit projections onto the $q_{out}$, $q_{side}$, and $q_{long}$ axes respectively for four angular bins relative to the reaction. These projections are from results for 10-20% central, 19.6 GeV Au+Au collisions with 0.15 < $k_T$ < 0.6 GeV/c.

Energy dependence of the HBT parameters for central Au+Au, Pb+Pb, and Pb+Au collisions at mid-rapidity and $\langle k_T \rangle \approx 0.22$ GeV/c. Errors on NA44, NA49, WA98, and CERES, points include systematic errors.The systematic errors for STAR points at all energies (from Table II) are of similar size to error bar for 39 GeV, shown as a representative example. Errors on other results are statistical only, to emphasize the trend.

The $\langle m_T \rangle$ dependence of $R_{out}$, $R_{side}$ and $R_{long}$ for all energies at 0-5% centrality. Errors are statistical only. These plot shows the difference (between $R_{out}$ and $R_{side}$) and the ratio $R_{out}$ / $R_{side}$ respectively.

The $\langle m_T \rangle$ dependence of $R_{out}$, $R_{side}$ and $R_{long}$ for each energy and multiple centralities. Errors are statistical only.

The dependence of the HBT radii on multiplicity,$\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta \rangle^{1/3}$, for $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c and$k_T\approx 0.39$ GeV/c. Results are for Au+Au collisions at STAR at 7 GeV. Errors are statistical only.

The dependence of the HBT radii on multiplicity,$\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta \rangle^{1/3}$, for $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c and$k_T\approx 0.39$ GeV/c. Results are for Au+Au collisions at STAR at 11.5 GeV. Errors are statistical only.

The dependence of the HBT radii on multiplicity,$\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta \rangle^{1/3}$, for $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c and$k_T\approx 0.39$ GeV/c. Results are for Au+Au collisions at STAR at 19.6 GeV. Errors are statistical only.

The dependence of the HBT radii on multiplicity,$\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta \rangle^{1/3}$, for $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c and$k_T\approx 0.39$ GeV/c. Results are for Au+Au collisions at STAR at 27 GeV. Errors are statistical only.

The dependence of the HBT radii on multiplicity,$\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta \rangle^{1/3}$, for $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c and$k_T\approx 0.39$ GeV/c. Results are for Au+Au collisions at STAR at 39 GeV. Errors are statistical only.

The dependence of the HBT radii on multiplicity,$\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta \rangle^{1/3}$, for $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c and$k_T\approx 0.39$ GeV/c. Results are for Au+Au collisions at STAR at 62.4 GeV. Errors are statistical only.

The dependence of the HBT radii on multiplicity,$\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta \rangle^{1/3}$, for $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c and$k_T\approx 0.39$ GeV/c. Results are for Au+Au collisions at STAR at 200 GeV. Errors are statistical only.

The dependence of the HBT radii on multiplicity,$\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta \rangle^{1/3}$, for $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c and$k_T\approx 0.39$ GeV/c. Results are for Si+Al collisions at E802, Pb+Au at CERES, Pb+Pb at ALICE. Errors are statistical only.

The beam energy dependence of the volume of the regions of homogeneity at kinetic freeze-out in central Au+Au, Pb+Pb and Pb+Au collisions with $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c.

The lifetime, $\tau$, of the system as a function of beam energy for central Au+Au collisions assuming a temperature of T = 0.12 GeV at kinetic freeze-out.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 7.7 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c for the azimuthally integrated radii and the 0th-order Fourier coefficients. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 7.7 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c, from the HHLW method (Gaussian fits to each angular bin) and a single global fit to all angular bins to directly. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at backward(−1<y<−0.5), forward(0.5<y<1)and mid(−0.5<y< 0.5) rapidity, in 7.7 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c using the global fit method. Error bars include only statistical uncertain- ties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 11.5 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c for the azimuthally integrated radii and the 0th-order Fourier coefficients. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 11.5 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c, from the HHLW method (Gaussian fits to each angular bin) and a single global fit to all angular bins to directly. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at backward(−1<y<−0.5), forward(0.5<y<1) and mid(−0.5<y< 0.5) rapidity, in 11.5 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c using the global fit method. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 19.6 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c for the azimuthally integrated radii and the 0th-order Fourier coefficients. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 19.6 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c, from the HHLW method (Gaussian fits to each angular bin) and a single global fit to all angular bins to directly. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at backward(−1<y<−0.5), forward(0.5<y<1) and mid(−0.5<y< 0.5) rapidity, in 19.6 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c using the global fit method. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 27 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c for the azimuthally integrated radii and the 0th-order Fourier coefficients. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 27 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c, from the HHLW method (Gaussian fits to each angular bin) and a single global fit to all angular bins to directly. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at backward(−1<y<−0.5), forward(0.5<y<1) and mid(−0.5<y< 0.5) rapidity, in 27 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c using the global fit method. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 39 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c for the azimuthally integrated radii and the 0th-order Fourier coefficients. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 39 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c, from the HHLW method (Gaussian fits to each angular bin) and a single global fit to all angular bins to directly. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at backward(−1<y<−0.5), forward(0.5<y<1) and mid(−0.5<y< 0.5) rapidity, in 39 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c using the global fit method. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 62.4 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c for the azimuthally integrated radii and the 0th-order Fourier coefficients. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 62.4 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c, from the HHLW method (Gaussian fits to each angular bin) and a single global fit to all angular bins to directly. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at backward(−1<y<−0.5), forward(0.5<y<1) and mid(−0.5<y< 0.5) rapidity, in 62.4 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c using the global fit method. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 200 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c for the azimuthally integrated radii and the 0th-order Fourier coefficients. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 200 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c, from the HHLW method (Gaussian fits to each angular bin) and a single global fit to all angular bins to directly. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at backward(−1<y<−0.5), forward(0.5<y<1) and mid(−0.5<y< 0.5) rapidity, in 200 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c using the global fit method. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Beam energy dependence of the $R_{ol,0}^2$ cross term for forward and backward rapidity with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c.

The eccentricity of the collisions at kinetic freez-out, εF , as a function of initial eccentricity relative to the participant plane, ε$_{PP}$, at mid-rapidity. All results are for ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties. The line has a slope of one indicating no change in shape.

The dependence of the kinetic freeze-out eccentricity of pions on collision energy in mid-central Au+Au collisions (E895, STAR) and Pb+Au collisions (CERES) for three rapidity regions and with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c. Several (2+1)D hydrodynamical models and UrQMD calculations are shown. Model centralities correspond to the data.

The dependence of the kinetic freeze-out eccentricity of pions on collision energy in mid-central Au+Au collisions using UrQMD calculations, (2+1)D hydro MC-KLN and (2+1)D hydro MC-GLB models with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties. Model centralities correspond to the data.

The dependence of the kinetic freeze-out eccentricity of pions on collision energy in mid-central Au+Au collisions using (2+1)D hydro EOS-Q, (2+1)D hydro EOS-H, and (2+1)D hydro EOS-I models with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties. Model centralities correspond to the data.

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.