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

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 0.15 GeV, for centrality 30-50%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 0.15 GeV, for centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 5 GeV, for centrality 0-10%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 5 GeV, for centrality 10-30%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 5 GeV, for centrality 30-50%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 5 GeV, for centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 10 GeV, for centrality 0-10%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 10 GeV, for centrality 10-30%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 10 GeV, for centrality 30-50%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Charged jet spectra using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading track selection of pT > 10 GeV, for centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Ratio of charged jet spectra with leading track selection of pT > 0.15 GeV to pT > 5 GeV using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3, for centrality 0-10%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Ratio of charged jet spectra with leading track selection of pT > 0.15 GeV to pT > 5 GeV using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3, for centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Ratio of charged jet spectra with leading track selection of pT > 10 GeV to pT > 5 GeV using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3, for centrality 0-10%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Ratio of charged jet spectra with leading track selection of pT > 10 GeV to pT > 5 GeV using two cone radius parameters R = 0.2 and 0.3, for centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 0.15 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 0-10% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 0.15 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 10-30% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 0.15 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 30-50% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 5 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 0-10% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 5 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 10-30% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 5 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 30-50% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 10 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 0-10% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 10 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 10-30% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, for charged jets with either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 10 GeV. Central collisions are defined to have centrality 30-50% and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, as a function of the average number of participants in the collision (<Npart>), for charged jets with pT = 60-70 GeV and either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 0.15 GeV. The correspondence between <Npart> and the centrality classes is given in Table 1 of the paper, and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, as a function of the average number of participants in the collision (<Npart>), for charged jets with pT = 60-70 GeV and either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 5 GeV. The correspondence between <Npart> and the centrality classes is given in Table 1 of the paper, and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Nuclear modification factor, constructed as the ratio of jet pT spectra in central and peripheral collisions normalized by the nuclear overlap functions, as a function of the average number of participants in the collision (<Npart>), for charged jets with pT = 60-70 GeV and either R = 0.2 or R = 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 10 GeV. The correspondence between <Npart> and the centrality classes is given in Table 1 of the paper, and peripheral collisions are defined to have centrality 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

Ratio of charged jet pT-spectra with radius parameter R = 0.2 and 0.3 and a leading charged particle with pT > 5 GeV, for two centrality classes 0-10% and 50-80%. The two systematic uncertainties correspond to the shape uncertainty and the correlated uncertainty.

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.

$\Delta N_p$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=27$ GeV for 0-5 percent, 30-40 percent and 70-80 percent collision centralities at midrapidity.

$\Delta N_p$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=39$ GeV for 0-5 percent, 30-40 percent and 70-80 percent collision centralities at midrapidity.

$\Delta N_p$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=62.4$ GeV for 0-5 percent, 30-40 percent and 70-80 percent collision centralities at midrapidity.

$\Delta N_p$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=200$ GeV for 0-5 percent, 30-40 percent and 70-80 percent collision centralities at midrapidity.

Centrality dependence of the cumulants of $\Delta N_p$ distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=7.7$ GeV.

Centrality dependence of the cumulants of $\Delta N_p$ distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=11.5$ GeV.

Centrality dependence of the cumulants of $\Delta N_p$ distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=19.6$ GeV.

Centrality dependence of the cumulants of $\Delta N_p$ distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=27$ GeV.

Centrality dependence of the cumulants of $\Delta N_p$ distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=39$ GeV.

Centrality dependence of the cumulants of $\Delta N_p$ distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=62.4$ GeV.

Centrality dependence of the cumulants of $\Delta N_p$ distributions for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=200$ GeV.

Centrality dependence of $S\sigma$/Skellam and $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_p$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=7.7$ GeV.

Centrality dependence of $S\sigma$/Skellam and $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_p$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=11.5$ GeV.

Centrality dependence of $S\sigma$/Skellam and $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_p$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=19.6$ GeV.

Centrality dependence of $S\sigma$/Skellam and $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_p$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=27$ GeV.

Centrality dependence of $S\sigma$/Skellam and $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_p$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=39$ GeV.

Centrality dependence of $S\sigma$/Skellam and $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_p$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=62.4$ GeV.

Centrality dependence of $S\sigma$/Skellam and $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_p$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=200$ GeV.

Collision energy and centrality dependence of the net-proton $S\sigma$ and $\kappa\sigma^2$ from Au+Au and p+p collisions at RHIC.

Collision energy and centrality dependence of the net-proton $S\sigma$ and $\kappa\sigma^2$ from Au+Au and p+p collisions at RHIC.

Collision energy and centrality dependence of the net-proton $S\sigma$ and $\kappa\sigma^2$ from Au+Au and p+p collisions at RHIC.

Collision energy and centrality dependence of the net-proton $S\sigma$ and $\kappa\sigma^2$ from Au+Au and p+p collisions at RHIC.

Cumulants of net-proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=7.7$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of net-proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=11.5$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of net-proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=19.6$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of net-proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=27$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of net-proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=39$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of net-proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=62.4$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of net-proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=200$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=7.7$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=11.5$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=19.6$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=27$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=39$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=62.4$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=200$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of anti-proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=7.7$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of anti-proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=11.5$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of anti-proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=19.6$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of anti-proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=27$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of anti-proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=39$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of anti-proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=62.4$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Cumulants of anti-proton distribution at $\sqrt{S_{NN}}=200$ GeV. (efficiency corrected).

Comparison of data to Monte Carlo for the distributions of two-photon invariant mass (left) and energy for the higher (center) and lower (right) energy photon.

Invariant mass distribution for the two-photon system with 7 < pT < 8 GeV/c.

Signal fractions calculated within the “peak region” of 0.1 < $M_{\gamma\gamma}$ < 0.2 $GeV/c^{2}$. Fractions for the full dataset as well as the subsets of longitudinal and transverse polarizations are shown as a function of pT (left), and the fractions for the transversely polarized data are shown as a function of $x_{F}$ integrated over 5 < pT < 12 GeV/c (right).

Signal fractions calculated within the “peak region” of 0.1 < $M_{\gamma\gamma}$ < 0.2 $GeV/c^{2}$. Fractions for the full dataset as well as the subsets of longitudinal and transverse polarizations are shown as a function of pT (left), and the fractions for the transversely polarized data are shown as a function of $x_{F}$ integrated over 5 < pT < 12 GeV/c (right).

Upper panel, the $\pi^{0}$ cross section (blue markers) is shown compared with an NLO pQCD cal- culation with three options for the scale parameter. The lower panel presents the ratio of the data to the pT-scale theory curve, as well as the ratio of the 2pT-scale and pT/2-scale theory curves to the pT-scale curve.

Upper panel, the $\pi^{0}$ cross section (blue markers) is shown compared with an NLO pQCD cal- culation with three options for the scale parameter. The lower panel presents the ratio of the data to the pT-scale theory curve, as well as the ratio of the 2pT-scale and pT/2-scale theory curves to the pT-scale curve.

The ALL results (blue markers) are presented with the DSSV prediction and the GRSV prediction using the best fit to polarized DIS ($\Delta$ g = std) and the maximum and minimum allowed values for gluon polarization.

The ALL results (blue markers) are presented with the DSSV prediction and the GRSV prediction using the best fit to polarized DIS ($\Delta$ g = std) and the maximum and minimum allowed values for gluon polarization.

The ALL results (blue markers) are presented with the DSSV prediction and the GRSV prediction using the best fit to polarized DIS ($\Delta$ g = std) and the maximum and minimum allowed values for gluon polarization.

The AN results are plotted versus $x_{F}$ integrated over 5 < pT < 12 GeV/c (left panel) and versus pT integrated over 0.06 < |$x_{F}$| < 0.27 (right panel).

The AN results are plotted versus $x_{F}$ integrated over 5 < pT < 12 GeV/c (left panel) and versus pT integrated over 0.06 < |$x_{F}$| < 0.27 (right panel).

The AN results are plotted versus $x_{F}$ integrated over 5 < pT < 12 GeV/c (left panel) and versus pT integrated over 0.06 < |x_{F}| < 0.27 (right panel).

The AN results are plotted versus $x_{F}$ integrated over 5 < pT < 12 GeV/c (left panel) and versus pT integrated over 0.06 < |$x_{F}$| < 0.27 (right panel).

Integrated cross sections for conventional PI+-, K+- and PBAR/P production. The second (sys) error is the uncertainty due to the model dependence of the extrapolation.

.

.

.

.

.

.

.

v2 vs. pt for average D0, D+ and D*+. The first systematic (sys) error is that from the data analysis and the second is from the B feed-down subtraction, as explained in the paper.

The LambdaBar/Lambda ratio at sqrt(s) = 0.9 TeV as a function of rapidity.

The LambdaBar/Lambda ratio at sqrt(s) = 2.76 TeV as a function of pT.

The LambdaBar/Lambda ratio at sqrt(s) = 2.76 TeV as a function of rapidity.

The LambdaBar/Lambda ratio at sqrt(s) = 7 TeV as a function of pT.

The LambdaBar/Lambda ratio at sqrt(s) = 7 TeV as a function of rapidity.

The XiBar+/Xi- ratio at sqrt(s) = 0.9 TeV integrated over rapidity |y|<0.8 as a function of pT.

The XiBar+/Xi- ratio at sqrt(s) = 2.76 TeV integrated over rapidity |y|<0.8 as a function of pT.

The XiBar+/Xi- ratio at sqrt(s) = 7 TeV as a function of pT.

The XiBar+/Xi- ratio at sqrt(s) = 7 TeV as a function of rapidity.

The OmegaBar+/Omega- ratio at sqrt(s) = 2.76 TeV integrated over rapidity |y|<0.8 as a function of pT.

The OmegaBar+/Omega- ratio at sqrt(s) = 7 TeV integrated over rapidity |y|<0.8 as a function of pT.

The pbar/p ratio in pp collisions at sqrt(s) = 7 TeV as a function of the relative charged-particle pseudorapidity density.

The pbar/p ratio in pp collisions at sqrt(s) = 2.76 TeV as a function of the relative charged-particle pseudorapidity density.

The pbar/p ratio in pp collisions at sqrt(s) = 0.9 TeV as a function of the relative charged-particle pseudorapidity density.

The LambdaBar/Lambda ratio in pp collisions at sqrt(s) = 7 TeV as a function of the relative charged-particle pseudorapidity density.

The LambdaBar/Lambda ratio in pp collisions at sqrt(s) = 2.76 TeV as a function of the relative charged-particle pseudorapidity density.

The XiBar+/Xi- ratio in pp collisions at sqrt(s) = 7 TeV as a function of the relative charged-particle pseudorapidity density.

The correlation differences $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle=\delta\langle A^{2}_{UD}\rangle-\delta\langle A^{2}_{ LR}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle=\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}-\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}$ as a function of $p_{T}$. The data are from 20-40% central (upper) and 0-20% central (lower) Au+Au collisions.

The charge asymmetry correlations $\delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ (left panels) and $\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ (center panels), and correlation differences $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle=\delta\langle A^{2}_{ UD}\rangle-\delta\langle A^{2}_{ LR}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle=\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}-\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}$ (right panels), as a function of the azimuthal elliptic anisotropy of high-$p_{T}$ ($p_{T}>2$~GeV/$c$) particles (upper panels) and low-$p_{T}$ ($p_{T}<2$~GeV/$c$) particles (lower panels). Data are from 20-40% Au+Au collisions. The particle $p_{T}$ range of $0.15<p_{T}<2$~GeV/$c$ is used for both EP construction and asymmetry calculation.

The charge asymmetry correlations $\delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ (left panels) and $\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ (center panels), and correlation differences $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle=\delta\langle A^{2}_{ UD}\rangle-\delta\langle A^{2}_{ LR}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle=\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}-\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}$ (right panels), as a function of the azimuthal elliptic anisotropy of high-$p_{T}$ ($p_{T}>2$~GeV/$c$) particles (upper panels) and low-$p_{T}$ ($p_{T}<2$~GeV/$c$) particles (lower panels). Data are from 20-40% Au+Au collisions. The particle $p_{T}$ range of $0.15<p_{T}<2$~GeV/$c$ is used for both EP construction and asymmetry calculation.

The wedge size dependences of charge multiplicity asymmetry correlations (upper panel), and their differences between out-of-plane and in-plane, $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ (lower panel) for 20-40% central Au+Au collisions.

The wedge size dependences of charge multiplicity asymmetry correlations (upper panel), and their differences between out-of-plane and in-plane, $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ (lower panel) for 20-40% central Au+Au collisions.

Charge multiplicity asymmetry correlations as a function of the wedge location, $\phi_{ w}$, in 20-40% central Au+Au collisions. The wedge size is $30^{\circ}$. The curves are the characteristic $\cos(2\phi_{ w}$) to guide the eye.

The wedge size dependence of the difference between the same-sign and opposite-sign, $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle-\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$.

The values of $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle-\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$, scaled by $N_{part}$, as a function of the measured average elliptic anisotropy $<v^{obs}_{2}}>$ in Au+Au collisions. The centrality bin number is labeled by each data point, 0 for 70-80% up to 8 for 0-5%.

$\Delta=\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle-\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$, the event-by-event elliptical anisotropy of particle distributions relative to the second-harmonic event plane reconstructed from TPC tracks (left panel) and the first harmonic event plane reconstructed from the ZDC-SMD neutron signals (middle panel), in 20-40% central Au+Au collisions. Right panel: Average $\Delta$ for events with $|v^{obs}_{2}|<0.04$ relative to the TPC event plane as a function of centrality.

$\Delta=\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle-\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$, the event-by-event elliptical anisotropy of particle distributions relative to the second-harmonic event plane reconstructed from TPC tracks (left panel) and the first harmonic event plane reconstructed from the ZDC-SMD neutron signals (middle panel), in 20-40% central Au+Au collisions. Right panel: Average $\Delta$ for events with $|v^{obs}_{2}|<0.04$ relative to the TPC event plane as a function of centrality.

$\Delta=\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle-\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$, the event-by-event elliptical anisotropy of particle distributions relative to the second-harmonic event plane reconstructed from TPC tracks (left panel) and the first harmonic event plane reconstructed from the ZDC-SMD neutron signals (middle panel), in 20-40% central Au+Au collisions. Right panel: Average $\Delta$ for events with $|v^{obs}_{2}|<0.04$ relative to the TPC event plane as a function of centrality.

Left panel: $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ with a random EP in 20-40% Au+Au collisions. The lines depict the results with reconstructed EP lower right panel for comparison. Middle panel: The differences in $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ between the reconstructed EP and random EP results, respectively. Right panel: $\Delta=\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle-\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ with a random EP (open triangles).

Left panel: $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ with a random EP in 20-40% Au+Au collisions. The lines depict the results with reconstructed EP lower right panel for comparison. Middle panel: The differences in $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ between the reconstructed EP and random EP results, respectively. Right panel: $\Delta=\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle-\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ with a random EP (open triangles).

Left panel: $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ with a random EP in 20-40% Au+Au collisions. The lines depict the results with reconstructed EP lower right panel for comparison. Middle panel: The differences in $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ between the reconstructed EP and random EP results, respectively. Right panel: $\Delta=\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle-\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ with a random EP (open triangles).

The correlation differences, $\langle A^{2}_{ LR}\rangle-\langle A^{2}_{ UD}\rangle$ and $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}-\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}$, scaled by the number of participants $(\pi/4)^2 N_{part}$. Also shown are $\langle \cos(\phi_{\alpha}+\phi_{\beta}-2\phi_{c})\rangle/v_{2,c} \approx \langle \cos(\phi_{\alpha}+\phi_{\beta}-2\psi_{ RP}) \rangle$ of same- and opposite-sign particle pairs ($\alpha$ and $\beta$) calculated from particles used for the charge asymmetry correlations with particle $c$ from those used for EP construction. The upper panel shows the default results where particles are divided according to $\eta$; the lower panel shows results with particles divided randomly into two halves and compared to published correlators.

The correlation differences, $\langle A^{2}_{ LR}\rangle-\langle A^{2}_{ UD}\rangle$ and $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}-\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}$, scaled by the number of participants $(\pi/4)^2 N_{part}$. Also shown are $\langle \cos(\phi_{\alpha}+\phi_{\beta}-2\phi_{c})\rangle/v_{2,c} \approx \langle \cos(\phi_{\alpha}+\phi_{\beta}-2\psi_{ RP}) \rangle$ of same- and opposite-sign particle pairs ($\alpha$ and $\beta$) calculated from particles used for the charge asymmetry correlations with particle $c$ from those used for EP construction. The upper panel shows the default results where particles are divided according to $\eta$; the lower panel shows results with particles divided randomly into two halves and compared to published correlators.

Upper panel: Positively charged particle multiplicity distributions versus the azimuthal angle, $\phi$, in 30-40% central Au+Au collisions. The data are shown separately for $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$. The magnetic polarities of the STAR magnet have been summed and the $p_{T}$ is integrated over the range $0.15<p_{T}<2$~GeV/$c$. The inverse of these distributions, properly normalized, were used to correct for the track efficiency versus $\phi$. Lower panel: Reconstructed event-plane azimuthal angle distributions in 30-40% central Au+Au collisions. Particles within $0.15 < p_{T} < 2$~GeV/$c$ from $\eta<0$ and $\eta>0$ were used separately to reconstruct the EP.

Upper panel: Positively charged particle multiplicity distributions versus the azimuthal angle, $\phi$, in 30-40% central Au+Au collisions. The data are shown separately for $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$. The magnetic polarities of the STAR magnet have been summed and the $p_{T}$ is integrated over the range $0.15<p_{T}<2$~GeV/$c$. The inverse of these distributions, properly normalized, were used to correct for the track efficiency versus $\phi$. Lower panel: Reconstructed event-plane azimuthal angle distributions in 30-40% central Au+Au collisions. Particles within $0.15 < p_{T} < 2$~GeV/$c$ from $\eta<0$ and $\eta>0$ were used separately to reconstruct the EP.

The relative charge asymmetry correlations, $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}/\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}$, as a function of the number of participants, $N_{part}$, for four combinations of $\eta$ ranges used for EP reconstruction and asymmetry calculation.

The asymmetry correlations, $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, before and after the corrections for the $\phi$-dependent acceptance $\times$ efficiency. The colored curves are the corresponding statistical fluctuations and detector effects. The results are separated for $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$. Only $\eta>0$ is shown for $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ and $\eta<0$ for $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ for clarity.

The asymmetry correlations, $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, before and after the corrections for the $\phi$-dependent acceptance $\times$ efficiency. The colored curves are the corresponding statistical fluctuations and detector effects. The results are separated for $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$. Only $\eta>0$ is shown for $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ and $\eta<0$ for $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ for clarity.

The asymmetry correlations, $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, before and after the corrections for the $\phi$-dependent acceptance $\times$ efficiency. The colored curves are the corresponding statistical fluctuations and detector effects. The results are separated for $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$. Only $\eta>0$ is shown for $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ and $\eta<0$ for $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ for clarity.

Left panel: Statistical fluctuation and detector effects in the charge asymmetry variance (multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$) from the $\eta<0$ region. The dotted curve shows the $1/N$ approximation, the dashed curve shows the statistical fluctuations $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat}}\rangle$ obtained by the (50-50) method (see the text). The solid curve connecting the solid points shows the net effect of the statistical fluctuations and detector non-uniformities, $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$, obtained by the adding-$\pi$ method, and the crosses shows the same but obtained from the ``scramble'' method. See the text for details. Middle panel: The statistical fluctuation effects relative to the $1/N$ approximation (thin curves) and the effects due to the imperfect detector (thick curves). The dashed curves are for the region $\eta>0$ and the solid curves are for $\eta<0$. Right panel: The ratios of the statistical fluctuation and detector effects $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle/\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$ and $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD,stat+det}}\rangle/\langle A^{2}_{+,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$, separately for the $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$ regions. The $\phi$-acceptance correction was applied for the results in this figure.

Left panel: Statistical fluctuation and detector effects in the charge asymmetry variance (multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$) from the $\eta<0$ region. The dotted curve shows the $1/N$ approximation, the dashed curve shows the statistical fluctuations $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat}}\rangle$ obtained by the (50-50) method (see the text). The solid curve connecting the solid points shows the net effect of the statistical fluctuations and detector non-uniformities, $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$, obtained by the adding-$\pi$ method, and the crosses shows the same but obtained from the ``scramble'' method. See the text for details. Middle panel: The statistical fluctuation effects relative to the $1/N$ approximation (thin curves) and the effects due to the imperfect detector (thick curves). The dashed curves are for the region $\eta>0$ and the solid curves are for $\eta<0$. Right panel: The ratios of the statistical fluctuation and detector effects $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle/\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$ and $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD,stat+det}}\rangle/\langle A^{2}_{+,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$, separately for the $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$ regions. The $\phi$-acceptance correction was applied for the results in this figure.

Left panel: Statistical fluctuation and detector effects in the charge asymmetry variance (multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$) from the $\eta<0$ region. The dotted curve shows the $1/N$ approximation, the dashed curve shows the statistical fluctuations $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat}}\rangle$ obtained by the (50-50) method (see the text). The solid curve connecting the solid points shows the net effect of the statistical fluctuations and detector non-uniformities, $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$, obtained by the adding-$\pi$ method, and the crosses shows the same but obtained from the ``scramble'' method. See the text for details. Middle panel: The statistical fluctuation effects relative to the $1/N$ approximation (thin curves) and the effects due to the imperfect detector (thick curves). The dashed curves are for the region $\eta>0$ and the solid curves are for $\eta<0$. Right panel: The ratios of the statistical fluctuation and detector effects $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle/\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$ and $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD,stat+det}}\rangle/\langle A^{2}_{+,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$, separately for the $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$ regions. The $\phi$-acceptance correction was applied for the results in this figure.

The asymmetry correlations, $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, separately for $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$. The star and triangle depict the results from $d$+Au collisions. The net effects of the statistical fluctuations and detector non-uniformities are shown as the curves.

The asymmetry correlations, $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, separately for $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$. The star and triangle depict the results from $d$+Au collisions. The net effects of the statistical fluctuations and detector non-uniformities are shown as the curves.

The asymmetry correlations, $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, separately for $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$. The star and triangle depict the results from $d$+Au collisions. The net effects of the statistical fluctuations and detector non-uniformities are shown as the curves.

The statistical and detector effect subtracted asymmetry correlations, $\delta\langle A^{2}_{+,0^{\circ}\pm\Delta\phi_{w}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\delta\langle A^{2}_{-,0^{\circ}\pm\Delta\phi_{w}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, before and after the corrections for the $\phi$-dependent acceptance $\times$ efficiency.

The statistical and detector effect subtracted asymmetry correlations, $\delta\langle A^{2}_{+,0^{\circ}\pm\Delta\phi_{w}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\delta\langle A^{2}_{-,0^{\circ}\pm\Delta\phi_{w}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, before and after the corrections for the $\phi$-dependent acceptance $\times$ efficiency.

The statistical and detector effect subtracted asymmetry correlations, $\delta\langle A^{2}_{+,0^{\circ}\pm\Delta\phi_{w}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\delta\langle A^{2}_{-,0^{\circ}\pm\Delta\phi_{w}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, before and after the corrections for the $\phi$-dependent acceptance $\times$ efficiency.

Dynamical charge asymmetry variance after removing the statistical and detector effects, $\delta\langle A^{2}_{\pm,{ LR}}\rangle=\langle A^{2}_{\pm,{ LR}}\rangle-\langle A^{2}_{\pm,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$, scaled by the number of participants $N_{part}$. The results are consistent between positive and negative $\eta$ regions and between positive and negative charges.

The second-harmonic event-plane resolution of sub-events ($\eta<0$ and $\eta>0$) as a function of the number of participants.

Charge multiplicity asymmetry correlations, $\delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ (left panel) and $\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ (middle panel), and their differences between UD\ and LR\ (right panel) as a function of the event-plane resolution $\epsilon_{ EP}(f)=\sqrt{\mean{\cos2(\psi_{{ EP},\eta>0}(f)-\psi_{{ EP},\eta<0}(f))}}$ in 20-30% central Au+Au collisions. The solid lines are free linear fits to the data, while the dashed lines are linear fits with the intercept fixed to zero at $\epsilon_{ EP}(f)=0$.

Charge multiplicity asymmetry correlations, $\delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ (left panel) and $\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ (middle panel), and their differences between UD\ and LR\ (right panel) as a function of the event-plane resolution $\epsilon_{ EP}(f)=\sqrt{\mean{\cos2(\psi_{{ EP},\eta>0}(f)-\psi_{{ EP},\eta<0}(f))}}$ in 20-30% central Au+Au collisions. The solid lines are free linear fits to the data, while the dashed lines are linear fits with the intercept fixed to zero at $\epsilon_{ EP}(f)=0$.

TCharge multiplicity asymmetry correlations, $\delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ (left panel) and $\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ (middle panel), and their differences between UD\ and LR\ (right panel) as a function of the event-plane resolution $\epsilon_{ EP}(f)=\sqrt{\mean{\cos2(\psi_{{ EP},\eta>0}(f)-\psi_{{ EP},\eta<0}(f))}}$ in 20-30% central Au+Au collisions. The solid lines are free linear fits to the data, while the dashed lines are linear fits with the intercept fixed to zero at $\epsilon_{ EP}(f)=0$.

The TPC second-harmonic (upper left) and ZDC-SMD first harmonic (upper right) event-plane resolution as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ in 20-40% central Au+Au collisions. The TPC second-harmonic (lower left) and ZDC-SMD first harmonic (lower right) event-plane resolution for events with $|v^{obs}_{2}|<0.04$ as a function of centrality.

The TPC second-harmonic (upper left) and ZDC-SMD first harmonic (upper right) event-plane resolution as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ in 20-40% central Au+Au collisions. The TPC second-harmonic (lower left) and ZDC-SMD first harmonic (lower right) event-plane resolution for events with $|v^{obs}_{2}|<0.04$ as a function of centrality.

The TPC second-harmonic (upper left) and ZDC-SMD first harmonic (upper right) event-plane resolution as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ in 20-40% central Au+Au collisions. The TPC second-harmonic (lower left) and ZDC-SMD first harmonic (lower right) event-plane resolution for events with $|v^{obs}_{2}|<0.04$ as a function of centrality.

The TPC second-harmonic (upper left) and ZDC-SMD first harmonic (upper right) event-plane resolution as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ in 20-40% central Au+Au collisions. The TPC second-harmonic (lower left) and ZDC-SMD first harmonic (lower right) event-plane resolution for events with $|v^{obs}_{2}|<0.04$ as a function of centrality.