Showing 25 of 76 results
According to first-principle lattice QCD calculations, the transition from quark-gluon plasma to hadronic matter is a smooth crossover in the region μB ≤ T c. In this range the ratio, C6=C2, of net-baryon distributions are predicted to be negative. In this Letter, we report the first measurement of the midrapidity net-proton C6=C2 from 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au þ Au collisions at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC). The dependence on collision centrality and kinematic acceptance in (p T , y) are analyzed. While for 27 and 54.4 GeV collisions the C6=C2 values are close to zero within uncertainties, it is observed that for 200 GeV collisions, the C6=C2 ratio becomes progressively negative from peripheral to central collisions. Transport model calculations without critical dynamics predict mostly positive values except for the most central collisions within uncertainties. These observations seem to favor a smooth crossover in the high-energy nuclear collisions at top RHIC energy.
Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.
Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.
Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.
Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.
Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.
Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.
Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.
Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.
Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.
Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.
Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.
Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.
Collisions centrality dependence of net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ in Au+Au collisions for |$y$| < 0.5 and 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. A shaded band shows the results from UrQMD model calculations. UrQMD calculations from the above three collision energies are consistent among them so they are merged in order to reduce statistical fluctuations. Details on these calculations can be found in the Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher]. The lattice QCD calculations [16, 17] for T = 160 MeV and $\mu_{B}$ < 110 MeV. are shown as a blue band at $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ $\approx$ 340.
Collisions centrality dependence of net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ in Au+Au collisions for |$y$| < 0.5 and 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. A shaded band shows the results from UrQMD model calculations. UrQMD calculations from the above three collision energies are consistent among them so they are merged in order to reduce statistical fluctuations. Details on these calculations can be found in the Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher]. The lattice QCD calculations [16, 17] for T = 160 MeV and $\mu_{B}$ < 110 MeV. are shown as a blue band at $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ $\approx$ 340.
Collisions centrality dependence of net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ in Au+Au collisions for |$y$| < 0.5 and 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. A shaded band shows the results from UrQMD model calculations. UrQMD calculations from the above three collision energies are consistent among them so they are merged in order to reduce statistical fluctuations. Details on these calculations can be found in the Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher]. The lattice QCD calculations [16, 17] for T = 160 MeV and $\mu_{B}$ < 110 MeV. are shown as a blue band at $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ $\approx$ 340.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Cumulants and their ratios up to the sixth order corrected for non-binomial efficiencies for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-5% centrality. The CBWC is applied for 2.5% centrality bin width. Results from the conventional efficiency correction are shown as black filled circles, results from the unfolding with the binomial detector response are shown as black open circles, and results from beta-binomial detector response with $\alpha+\sigma$, $\alpha$ and $\alpha-\sigma$ are shown in green triangles, red squares and blue triangles, respectively. C5, C6, C2/C1, C5/C1 and C6/C2 are scaled by constant shown in each column.
Collision centrality dependence of net-proton C6/C2 in Au+Au collisions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV within |y| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT (GeV/c) < 2.0. Results with and without the CBWC are overlaid. The results are corrected for detector efficiencies. Points for different calculation methods are staggered horizontally to improve clarity.
Collision centrality dependence of net-proton C6/C2 in Au+Au collisions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV within |y| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT (GeV/c) < 2.0. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. Shaded and hatched bands show the results from UrQMD model calculations The lattice QCD calculations [13, 14] for T = 160 MeV and $\mu_{B}$ < 110 MeV. are shown as a blue band at $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ $\approx$ 340.
We report a systematic measurement of cumulants, $C_{n}$, for net-proton, proton and antiproton multiplicity distributions, and correlation functions, $\kappa_n$, for proton and antiproton multiplicity distributions up to the fourth order in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm {NN}}}$ = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 54.4, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The $C_{n}$ and $\kappa_n$ are presented as a function of collision energy, centrality and kinematic acceptance in rapidity, $y$, and transverse momentum, $p_{T}$. The data were taken during the first phase of the Beam Energy Scan (BES) program (2010 -- 2017) at the BNL Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) facility. The measurements are carried out at midrapidity ($|y| <$ 0.5) and transverse momentum 0.4 $<$$p_{\rm T}$$<$ 2.0 GeV/$c$, using the STAR detector at RHIC. We observe a non-monotonic energy dependence ($\sqrt{s_{\mathrm {NN}}}$ = 7.7 -- 62.4 GeV) of the net-proton $C_{4}$/$C_{2}$ with the significance of 3.1$\sigma$ for the 0-5% central Au+Au collisions. This is consistent with the expectations of critical fluctuations in a QCD-inspired model. Thermal and transport model calculations show a monotonic variation with $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm {NN}}}$. For the multiparticle correlation functions, we observe significant negative values for a two-particle correlation function, $\kappa_2$, of protons and antiprotons, which are mainly due to the effects of baryon number conservation. Furthermore, it is found that the four-particle correlation function, $\kappa_4$, of protons plays a role in determining the energy dependence of proton $C_4/C_1$ below 19.6 GeV, which cannot be understood by the effect of baryon number conservation.
Reference charged particle multiplicity distributions using only pions and kaons ...
Reference charged particle multiplicity distributions using only pions and kaons ...
Reference charged particle multiplicity distributions using only pions and kaons ...
Reference charged particle multiplicity distributions using only pions and kaons ...
Reference charged particle multiplicity distributions using only pions and kaons ...
Reference charged particle multiplicity distributions using only pions and kaons ...
Reference charged particle multiplicity distributions using only pions and kaons ...
Reference charged particle multiplicity distributions using only pions and kaons ...
Reference charged particle multiplicity distributions using only pions and kaons ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$\Delta N_\mathrm{p}$ multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ for 0-5%, ...
$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.
$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.
$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.
$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.
$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.
$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.
$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.
$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.
$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.
$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.
$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.
$C_{n}$ of net-proton distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV as a function of $N_{part}$.
$\kappa\sigma^2$ as a function of collision energy for Au+Au collisions for 0-5% centrality.
Efficiency uncorrected $C_n$ of net-proton proton and anti-proton multiplicity distribution in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ = 7.7 - 200 GeV as function of $\left\langle N_\text{part} \right\rangle$.
Efficiencies of proton and anti-proton as a function of $p_\mathrm{T}$ in Au+Au collisions for various $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ and collision centralities.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Distribution of reconstructed protons from embedding simulations in 200 GeV top 2.5%-central Au+Au collisions.
Unfolded net-proton multiplicity distributions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}$ = 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.
Unfolded net-proton multiplicity distributions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}$ = 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.
Unfolded net-proton multiplicity distributions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}$ = 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.
Unfolded net-proton multiplicity distributions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}$ = 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.
Unfolded net-proton multiplicity distributions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}$ = 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.
Unfolded net-proton multiplicity distributions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}$ = 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.
Unfolded net-proton multiplicity distributions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}$ = 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.
Cumulant ratios as a function of $N_{part}$ for net-proton distributions in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV
Cumulant ratios as a function of $N_{part}$ for net-proton distributions in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV
Collision centrality dependence of proton, anti-proton and net-proton cumulants
Cumulants and their ratios as a function of $<N_{part}>$, for the net-proton distribution
Centrality dependence of normalized correlation functions $\kappa_n/$kappa_1$ for proton and anti-proton multiplicity distribution
Rapidity acceptance dependence of cumulants of proton, anti-proton and net-proton multiplicity distributions in 0-5% central Au+Au collision ...
Rapidity acceptance dependence of normalized correlation functions up to fourth order.
Rapidity-acceptance dependence of cumulant ratios of proton, anti-proton and net-proton multiplicity distributions in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions...
pT-acceptance dependence of cumulants of proton, anti-proton and net-proton multiplicity distributions for 0-5% central Au+Au collisions ...
pT-acceptance dependence of the normalized correlation functions up to fourth order ($\kappa_n/\kappa_1$, $n$ = 2, 3, 4) for proton and anti-proton multiplicity distributions in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions ...
pT-acceptance dependence of cumulant ratios of proton, anti-proton and net-proton multiplicity distributions for 0-5% central Au+Au collisions ...
Cumulant ratios from HRG model as a function of collision energy $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$
UrQMD results on pT acceptance dependence for cumulant ratios for proton and baryon
Polynomial fit of cumulant ratios as a function of collision energy $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$
Polynomial fit of cumulant ratios as a function of collision energy $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$
Polynomial fit of cumulant ratios as a function of collision energy $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$
Collision energy dependence of $C_2/C_1$, $C_3/C_2$ and $C_4/C_2$ for net-proton multiplicity distribution in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions. The expreimental net-proton measurements are compared to corresponding values from UrQMD and HRG models within the expreimental acceptances.
Collision energy dependence of $C_2/C_1$, $C_3/C_2$ and $C_4/C_2$ for net-proton multiplicity distribution in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions. The expreimental net-proton measurements are compared to corresponding values from UrQMD and HRG models within the expreimental acceptances.
Collision energy dependence of $C_2/C_1$, $C_3/C_2$ and $C_4/C_2$ for net-proton multiplicity distribution in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions. The expreimental net-proton measurements are compared to corresponding values from UrQMD and HRG models within the expreimental acceptances.
Collision energy dependence of $C_2/C_1$, $C_3/C_2$ and $C_4/C_2$ for net-proton multiplicity distribution in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions. The expreimental net-proton measurements are compared to corresponding values from UrQMD and HRG models within the expreimental acceptances.
Collision energy dependence of $C_2/C_1$, $C_3/C_2$ and $C_4/C_2$ for net-proton multiplicity distribution in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions. The expreimental net-proton measurements are compared to corresponding values from UrQMD and HRG models within the expreimental acceptances.
Collision energy dependence of $C_2/C_1$, $C_3/C_2$ and $C_4/C_2$ for net-proton multiplicity distribution in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions. The expreimental net-proton measurements are compared to corresponding values from UrQMD and HRG models within the expreimental acceptances.
Collision energy dependence of $C_2/C_1$, $C_3/C_2$ and $C_4/C_2$ for net-proton multiplicity distribution in 0-5% central Au+Au collisions. The expreimental net-proton measurements are compared to corresponding values from UrQMD and HRG models within the expreimental acceptances.
The measurements of particle multiplicity distributions have generated considerable interest in understanding the fluctuations of conserved quantum numbers in the Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) hadronization regime, in particular near a possible critical point and near the chemical freeze-out. We report the measurement of efficiency and centrality bin width corrected cumulant ratios ($C_{2}/C_{1}$, $C_{3}/C_{2}$) of net-$\Lambda$ distributions, in the context of both strangeness and baryon number conservation, as a function of collision energy, centrality and rapidity. The results are for Au + Au collisions at five beam energies ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV) recorded with the Solenoidal Tracker at RHIC (STAR). We compare our results to the Poisson and negative binomial (NBD) expectations, as well as to Ultra-relativistic Quantum Molecular Dynamics (UrQMD) and Hadron Resonance Gas (HRG) model predictions. Both NBD and Poisson baselines agree with data within the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The ratios of the measured cumulants show no features of critical fluctuations. The chemical freeze-out temperatures extracted from a recent HRG calculation, which was successfully used to describe the net-proton, net-kaon and net-charge data, indicate $\Lambda$ freeze-out conditions similar to those of kaons. However, large deviations are found when comparing to temperatures obtained from net-proton fluctuations. The net-$\Lambda$ cumulants show a weak, but finite, dependence on the rapidity coverage in the acceptance of the detector, which can be attributed to quantum number conservation.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C1, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 19.6 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions. Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C1, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 27 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C1, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 39 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C1, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 62.4 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C1, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 200 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C2, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 19.6 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C2, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 27 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C2, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 39 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C2, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 62.4 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C2, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 200 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C3, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 19.6 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C3, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 27 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C3, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 39 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C3, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 62.4 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C3, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 200 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C2/C1, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 19.6 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C2/C1, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 27 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C2/C1, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 39 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C2/C1, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 62.4 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C2/C1, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 200 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C3/C2, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 19.6 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C3/C2, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 27 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C3/C2, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 39 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C3/C2, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 62.4 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C3/C2, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 200 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C2/C1 in most central (0-5%) and peripheral (50-60%). Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.
Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C3/C2 in most central (0-5%) and peripheral (50-60%). Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.
Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda, net-proton and net-kaon cumulant ratios C2/C1 in most central (0-5%) collision.
Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda, net-proton and net-kaon cumulant ratios C3/C2 in most central (0-5%) collision.
Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C2/C1 in most central (0-5%) collision, along with results from HRG.
Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C3/C2 in most central (0-5%) collision, along with results from HRG.
Rapidity dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C2/C1 in most central (0-5%) collision, along with results from NBD.
Rapidity dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C3/C2 in most central (0-5%) collision, along with results from NBD.
Rapidity dependence of normalized C2 in most central (0-5%) collision at Au+Au 19.6 GeV.
Rapidity dependence of normalized C2 in most central (0-5%) collision at Au+Au 200 GeV.
The measurement of $K^{*}(892)^0$ resonance production via its $K^{+}\pi^{-}$ decay mode in inelastic p+p collisions at beam momentum 158 GeV/$c$ ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}=17.3$ GeV) is presented. The data were recorded by the NA61/SHINE hadron spectrometer at the CERN Super Proton Synchrotron. The $\textit{template}$ method was used to extract the $K^{*}(892)^0$ signal and double differential transverse momentum and rapidity spectra were obtained. The full phase-space mean multiplicity of $K^{*}(892)^0$ mesons was found to be $(78.44 \pm 0.38 \mathrm{(stat)} \pm 6.0 \mathrm{(sys)) \cdot 10^{-3}}$. The NA61/SHINE results are compared with the E$_{POS}$1.99 and Hadron Resonance Gas models as well as with world data from p+p and nucleus-nucleus collisions.
Numerical values of mass and width of $K^{∗}(892)^0$ mesons fitted in 0<y<0.5 and presented in Fig.8. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic.
Numerical values of double-differential yields $d^{2}n/dydp_{T}$ presented in Fig. 10, given in units of $10^{−3} (GeV/c)^{−1}$. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic
Numerical values of double-differential yields $d^{2}n/dydp_{T}$ presented in Fig. 10, given in units of $10^{−3} (GeV/c)^{−1}$. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic
Numerical values of double-differential yields $d^{2}n/dydp_{T}$ presented in Fig. 10, given in units of $10^{−3} (GeV/c)^{−1}$. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic
Numerical values of double-differential yields $1/m_T d^{2}n/dm_{T}dy$ given in units of $10^{−3}(GeV)^{−2}$ and presented in Fig. 11; the values of $m_T−m_0$ specify the bin centers. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic
Numerical values of double-differential yields $1/m_T d^{2}n/dm_{T}dy$ given in units of $10^{−3}(GeV)^{−2}$ and presented in Fig. 11; the values of $m_T−m_0$ specify the bin centers. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic
Numerical values of double-differential yields $1/m_T d^{2}n/dm_{T}dy$ given in units of $10^{−3}(GeV)^{−2}$ and presented in Fig. 11; the values of $m_T−m_0$ specify the bin centers. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic
Numerical values of the $p_T$-integrated and extrapolated $dn/dy$ distribution presented in Fig. 12. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic. Additionally, the width of the Gaussian fit to the $dn/dy$ distribution, as well as the mean multiplicity of $K^{*}(892)^0$ mesons are shown (see the text for details)
The mean multiplicities $\langle K^{*}(892)^0\rangle$ and the widths of the rapidity distributions $\sigma_y$ obtained from $dn/dy$ distributions (see the text for details). The first uncertainty is statistical and the second systematic
The mean multiplicity of $K^{*}(892)^0$ mesons for 158 GeV/$c$ inelastic p+p interactions compared to theoretical multiplicities obtained within Hadron Gas Models
The mean multiplicities of different particle species measured in nucleus-nucleus collisions at 158$A$ GeV/$c$ by NA49 and NA61/SHINE. The total uncertainties of $\langle K^{*}(892)^0\rangle$, $\langle K^{+}\rangle$ and $\langle K^{-}\rangle$ were taken as the square roots of the sums of squares of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For NA49 p+p data, the $\langle K^{+}\rangle$ and $\langle K^{-}\rangle$ results include statistical uncertainties only($\langle K^{+}\rangle$ =0.2267$\pm$0.0006 and $\langle K^{-}\rangle$=0.1303$\pm$0.0004), whereas systematic uncertainties for total yields were not reported. Therefore, NA61/SHINE $\langle K^{+}\rangle$ and $\langle K^{-}\rangle$ values were used in the $\langle K^{*}(892)^0 \rangle / \langle K^{+} \rangle$ and $\langle K^{*}(892)^{0}\rangle / \langle K^{-} \rangle$ ratios. The numbers of $\langle K^{+} \rangle$ and $\langle K^{−}\rangle$ and their uncertainties for the 5% most central Pb+Pb collisions were multiplied by a factor 262/362 in orderto estimate charged kaon multiplicities in the 23.5% most central Pb+Pb reactions
The NA61/SHINE experiment at the CERN SPS is performing a uniqe study of the phase diagram of strongly interacting matter by varying collision energy and nuclear mass number of colliding nuclei. In central Pb+Pb collisions the NA49 experiment found structures in the energy dependence of several observables in the CERN SPS energy range that had been predicted for the transition to a deconfined phase. New measurements of NA61/SHINE find intriguing similarities in p+p interactions for which no deconfinement transition is expected at SPS energies. Possible implications will be discussed.
K+/PI+ at y=0.
K+/PI+ at y=0.
<K+>/<PI+>.
<K+>/<PI>+.
Inverse slope parameter T.
Inverse slope parameter T.
Inverse slope parameter T.
Inverse slope parameter T.
K-/PI- at y=0.
K-/PI- at y=0.
<K->/<PI->.
<K->/<PI->.
Results on $\phi$ meson production in inelastic p+p collisions at CERN SPS energies are presented. They are derived from data collected by the NA61/SHINE fixed target experiment, by means of invariant mass spectra fits in the $\phi \to K^+K^-$ decay channel. They include the first ever measured double differential spectra of $\phi$ mesons as a function of rapidity $y$ and transverse momentum $p_T$ for proton beam momenta of 80 GeV/c and 158 GeV/c, as well as single differential spectra of $y$ or $p_T$ for beam momentum of 40 GeV/c. The corresponding total $\phi$ yields per inelastic p+p event are obtained. These results are compared with existing data on $\phi$ meson production in p+p collisions. The comparison shows consistency but superior accuracy of the present measurements. The emission of $\phi$ mesons in p+p reactions is confronted with that occurring in Pb+Pb collisions, and the experimental results are compared with model predictions. It appears that none of the considered models can properly describe all the experimental observables.
Double differential multiplicity of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 158 GeV/c, as a function of transverse momentum $p_T$ and rapidity $y$.
Double differential multiplicity of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 80 GeV/c, as a function of transverse momentum $p_T$ and rapidity $y$.
Transverse momentum $p_T$ spectrum of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 40 GeV/c, in a broad rapidity $y$ bin of (0, 1.5).
Transverse mass $m_T$ spectrum at midrapidity of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 158 GeV/c. $m_0$ is the PDG mass of the $\phi$ meson.
Transverse mass $m_T$ spectrum at midrapidity of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 80 GeV/c. $m_0$ is the PDG mass of the $\phi$ meson.
Dependence of the slope parameter $T$ of the transverse momentum spectrum on rapidity $y$, of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 158 GeV/c.
Dependence of the slope parameter $T$ of the transverse momentum spectrum on rapidity $y$, of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 80 GeV/c.
Dependence of the width $\sigma_y$ of the rapidity distributions on $p_T$, of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 158 GeV/c.
Dependence of the width $\sigma_y$ of the rapidity distributions on $p_T$, of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 80 GeV/c.
Rapidity spectrum of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 158 GeV/c.
Rapidity spectrum of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 80 GeV/c.
Rapidity spectrum of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 40 GeV/c.
Energy dependence of ratios of total yields of $\phi$ mesons to mean total yields of pions produced in in minimum bias p+p collisions at CERN SPS energies.
Energy dependence of double ratios of total yields of $\phi$ mesons to mean total yields of pions in central Pb+Pb collisions over minimum bias p+p collisions at CERN SPS energies.
Energy dependence of total yields of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at CERN SPS energies.
Energy dependence of midrapidity yields of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at CERN SPS energies.
Widths of rapidity distributions of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at CERN SPS energies, as a function of beam rapidity.
We report systematic measurements of bulk properties of the system created in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$ = 14.5 GeV recorded by the STAR detector at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC).The transverse momentum spectra of $\pi^{\pm}$, $K^{\pm}$ and $p(\bar{p})$ are studied at mid-rapidity ($|y| < 0.1$) for nine centrality intervals. The centrality, transverse momentum ($p_T$),and pseudorapidity ($\eta$) dependence of inclusive charged particle elliptic flow ($v_2$), and rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow ($v_{1}$) results near mid-rapidity are also presented. These measurements are compared with the published results from Au+Au collisions at other energies, and from Pb+Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$ = 2.76 TeV. The results at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$ = 14.5 GeV show similar behavior as established at other energies and fit well in the energy dependence trend. These results are important as the 14.5 GeV energy fills the gap in $\mu_B$, which is of the order of 100 MeV,between $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$ =11.5 and 19.6 GeV. Comparisons of the data with UrQMD and AMPT models show poor agreement in general.
The $p_{T}$ spectra of proton measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicated in the legend
The $p_{T}$ spectra of antiproton measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicatedin the legend
The $p_{T}$ spectra of $\pi^{+}$ measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicatedin the legend
The $p_{T}$ spectra of $\pi^{-}$ measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicatedin the legend
The $p_{T}$ spectra of $K^{+}$ measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicatedin the legend
The $p_{T}$ spectra of $K^{-}$ measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicatedin the legend
Average $p_{T}$ of $\pi^{+}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Average $p_{T}$ of $\pi^{-}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Average $p_{T}$ of $K^{+}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Average $p_{T}$ of $K^{-}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$= 14.5 GeV.
Average $p_{T}$ of p as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Average $p_{T}$ of p-bar as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of $\pi^{+}$ scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of $\pi^{-}$ scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of $K^{+}$ scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of $K^{-}$ scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of proton scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of p-bar scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Kinetic freeze-out temperature as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Velocity as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
The event plane resolution calculated for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV as a function of centrality.
Inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 at mid-pseudorapidity (|y| <1.0) as a function of $p_{T}$ for 10-20% centrality in Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 at mid-pseudorapidity (|y| <1.0) as a function of $p_{T}$ for 20-30% centrality in Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 at mid-pseudorapidity (|y| <1.0) as a function of $p_{T}$ for 30-40% centrality in Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 at mid-pseudorapidity (|y| <1.0) as a function of transverse momentum $p_{T}$ for six centrality classes, obtained using the $\eta$-sub event plane method in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 at mid-pseudorapidity (|y| <1.0) as a function of $p_{T}$-integrated v2($\eta$) for six centrality classes, obtained using the $\eta$-sub event plane method in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
The ratio inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 over root-mean-square participant eccentricity $Epart_{2}$ at mid-pseudorapidity as a function of $p_{T}$ for 10–20%, 30–40%, and 50–60% collision centralities in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Summary of centrality bins, average number of participants $N_{part}$, number of binary collisions $N_{coll}$, reaction plane eccentricity eRP, participant eccentricity epart, root-mean-square of the participant eccentricity epart{2}, and transverse area $S_{part}$ from MC Glauber simulations at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
The inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2($\eta$-sub) versus pseudorapidity $\eta$ at mid-pseudorapidity for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27.0 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39.0 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27.0 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39.0 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 – 39 GeV for 30-60% centrality intervals.
The two-particle angular correlation functions, $R_2$, of pions, kaons, and protons in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4, and 200 GeV were measured by the STAR experiment at RHIC. These correlations were measured for both like-sign and unlike-sign charge combinations and versus the centrality. The correlations of pions and kaons show the expected near-side ({\it i.e.}, at small relative angles) peak resulting from short-range mechanisms. The amplitudes of these short-range correlations decrease with increasing beam energy. However, the proton correlation functions exhibit strong anticorrelations in the near-side region. This behavior is observed for the first time in an A+A collision system. The observed anticorrelation is $p_{T}$-independent and decreases with increasing beam energy and centrality. The experimental results are also compared to the Monte Carlo models UrQMD, Hijing, and AMPT.
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 7.7 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 11.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 14.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 19.6 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 27 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 39 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 64.2 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 200 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 7.7 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 11.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 14.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 19.6 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 27 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 39 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 64.2 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 200 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 7.7 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 11.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 14.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 19.6 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 27 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 39 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 64.2 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 200 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 7.7 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 11.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 14.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 19.6 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 27 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 39 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 64.2 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 200 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like- sign kaons in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV, mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign kaons in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV, mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) pions in Au+Au collisions at 30%-40% centrality and eight different energies from 7.7 GeV (top left) to 200 GeV (bottom right). Also shown at the highest beam energies in the right frames are the antiproton-antiproton correlations.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) protons in Au+Au collisions at 30%-40% centrality and eight different energies from 7.7 GeV (top left) to 200 GeV (bottom right). Also shown at the highest beam energies in the right frames are the antiproton-antiproton correlations.
Near-side and away-side ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ projection of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) pions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom), 30%-40% centrality.
Near-side and away-side ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ projection of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) protons in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom), 30%-40% centrality.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) pions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom), 30%-40% centrality compared with the UrQMD (solid line), Hijing (dash-dotted line), and AMPT (dotted line) simulations.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) protons in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom), 30%-40% centrality compared with the UrQMD (solid line), Hijing (dash-dotted line), and AMPT (dotted line) simulations.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) pions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom) for the most central 0%-5%, mid-central 30%-40% and pe- ripheral 60%-70% events.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) protons in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom) for the most central 0%-5%, mid-central 30%-40% and pe- ripheral 60%-70% events.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) pions in low and high pT in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom) in 30%-40% centrality.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) protons in low and high pT in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom) in 30%-40% centrality.
We present STAR measurements of strange hadron ($\mathrm{K}^{0}_{\mathrm S}$, $\Lambda$, $\overline{\Lambda}$, $\Xi^-$, $\overline{\Xi}^+$, $\Omega^-$, $\overline{\Omega}^+$, and $\phi$) production at mid-rapidity ($|y| < 0.5$) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}$ = 7.7 - 39 GeV from the Beam Energy Scan Program at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC). Transverse momentum spectra, averaged transverse mass, and the overall integrated yields of these strange hadrons are presented versus the centrality and collision energy. Antibaryon-to-baryon ratios ($\overline{\Lambda}$/$\Lambda$, $\overline{\Xi}^+$/$\Xi^-$, $\overline{\Omega}^+$/$\Omega^-$) are presented as well, and used to test a thermal statistical model and to extract the temperature normalized strangeness and baryon chemical potentials at hadronic freeze-out ($\mu_{B}/T_{\rm ch}$ and $\mu_{S}/T_{\rm ch}$) in central collisions. Strange baryon-to-pion ratios are compared to various model predictions in central collisions for all energies. The nuclear modification factors ($R_{\textrm{CP}}$) and antibaryon-to-meson ratios as a function of transverse momentum are presented for all collision energies. The $\mathrm{K}^{0}_{\mathrm S}$$R_{\textrm{CP}}$ shows no suppression for $p_{\rm T}$ up to 3.5 $\mathrm{GeV} / c$ at energies of 7.7 and 11.5 GeV. The $\overline{\Lambda}$/$\mathrm{K}^{0}_{\mathrm S}$ ratio also shows baryon-to-meson enhancement at intermediate $p_{\rm T}$ ($\approx$2.5 $\mathrm{GeV} / c$) in central collisions at energies above 19.6 GeV. Both observations suggest that there is likely a change of the underlying strange quark dynamics at collision energies below 19.6 GeV.
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
We report the energy dependence of mid-rapidity (anti-)deuteron production in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}} =\ $7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4, and 200 GeV, measured by the STAR experiment at RHIC. The yield of deuterons is found to be well described by the thermal model. The collision energy, centrality, and transverse momentum dependence of the coalescence parameter $B_2$ are discussed. We find that the values of $B_2$ for anti-deuterons are systematically lower than those for deuterons, indicating that the correlation volume of anti-baryons is larger than that of baryons at $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ from 19.6 to 39 GeV. In addition, values of $B_2$ are found to vary with collision energy and show a broad minimum around $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}=\ $20 to 40 GeV, which might imply a change of the equation of state of the medium in these collisions.
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'transverse momentum spectra for anti-deuterons in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of $<p_{T}>$ of deuterons (top panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of $<p_{T}>$ of deuterons (top panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of $<p_{T}>$ of deuterons (top panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of $<p_{T}>$ of deuterons (top panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of $<p_{T}>$ of deuterons (top panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of $<p_{T}>$ of deuterons (top panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of $<p_{T}>$ of deuterons (top panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of $<p_{T}>$ of deuterons (top panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of $<p_{T}>$ of anti-deuterons (bottom panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of $<p_{T}>$ of anti-deuterons (bottom panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of $<p_{T}>$ of anti-deuterons (bottom panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of $<p_{T}>$ of anti-deuterons (bottom panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of $<p_{T}>$ of anti-deuterons (bottom panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by 0.5$<N_{part}>$ of deuterons (top panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by 0.5$<N_{part}>$ of deuterons (top panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by 0.5$<N_{part}>$ of deuterons (top panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by 0.5$<N_{part}>$ of deuterons (top panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by 0.5$<N_{part}>$ of deuterons (top panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by 0.5$<N_{part}>$ of deuterons (top panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by 0.5$<N_{part}>$ of deuterons (top panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by 0.5$<N_{part}>$ of deuterons (top panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by 0.5$<N_{part}>$ of anti-deuterons (bottom panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by 0.5$<N_{part}>$ of anti-deuterons (bottom panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by 0.5$<N_{part}>$ of anti-deuterons (bottom panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by 0.5$<N_{part}>$ of anti-deuterons (bottom panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by 0.5$<N_{part}>$ of anti-deuterons (bottom panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by 0.5$<N_{part}>$ of anti-deuterons (bottom panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by 0.5$<N_{part}>$ of anti-deuterons (bottom panel) in Au+Au collisions'
'Energy dependence of $\bar{d}/d$ ratios from Au+Au collisions at RHIC'
'Energy dependence of $d/p$ yield ratios'
'Energy dependence of $\bar{d}/\bar{p}$ yield ratios'
'Energy dependence of $d/p^{2}$ yield ratios (top panel)'
'Energy dependence of $\bar{d}/\bar{p}^{2}$ yield ratios (top panel)'
'Coalescence parameter $B_{2}$ as a function of $m_{T}$ $-$ $m_{0}$ for deuterons (left panel)'
'Coalescence parameter $B_{2}$ as a function of $m_{T}$ $-$ $m_{0}$ for anti-deuterons (right panel)'
'Energy dependence of the coalescence parameter for $B_{2}(d)$'
'Energy dependence of the coalescence parameter for $B_{2}(\bar{d})$'
We report the first measurements of a complete second-order cumulant matrix of net-charge, net-proton, and net-kaon multiplicity distributions for the first phase of the beam energy scan program at RHIC. This includes the centrality and, for the first time, the pseudorapidity window dependence of both diagonal and off-diagonal cumulants in Au+Au collisions at \sNN~= 7.7-200 GeV. Within the available acceptance of $|\eta|<0.5$, the cumulants grow linearly with the pseudorapidity window. Relative to the corresponding measurements in peripheral collisions, the ratio of off-diagonal over diagonal cumulants in central collisions indicates an excess correlation between net-charge and net-kaon, as well as between net-charge and net-proton. The strength of such excess correlation increases with the collision energy. The correlation between net-proton and net-kaon multiplicity distributions is observed to be negative at \sNN~= 200 GeV and change to positive at the lowest collision energy. Model calculations based on non-thermal (UrQMD) and thermal (HRG) production of hadrons cannot explain the data. These measurements will help map the QCD phase diagram, constrain hadron resonance gas model calculations, and provide new insights on the energy dependence of baryon-strangeness correlations. An erratum has been added to address the issue of self-correlation in the previously considered efficiency correction for off-diagonal cumulant measurement. Previously considered unidentified (net-)charge correlation results ($\sigma^{11}_{Q,p}$ and $\sigma^{11}_{Q,k})$ are now replaced with identified (net-)charge correlation ($\sigma^{11}_{Q^{PID},p}$ and $\sigma^{11}_{Q^{PID},k}$)
The dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal and off-diagonal cumulants on the width of the η-window. The filled and open circles represent 0-5% and 70-80% central collisions respectively. The shaded band represents the systematic uncertainty. The statistical uncertainties are within the marker size and solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
The dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal and off-diagonal cumulants on the width of the η-window. The filled and open circles represent 0-5% and 70-80% central collisions respectively. The shaded band represents the systematic uncertainty. The statistical uncertainties are within the marker size and solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli- sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Error bars are statistical and boxes are systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Error bars are statistical and boxes are systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Beam energy dependence of cumulant ratios (Cp,k,CQ,k and CQ,p; top to bottom) of net-proton, net-kaon and net-charge (identified) for Au+Au collisions at sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The bands denote the UrQMD calculations for 0-5% and 70-80% central collisions and the HRG values are denoted by red dotted lines. The Poisson baseline is denoted by black dashed lines. Error bars are statistical and boxes are systematic errors.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Beam energy dependence of cumulant ratios (Cp,k,CQ,k and CQ,p; top to bottom) of net-proton, net-kaon and identified net-charge for Au+Au collisions at sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The bands denote the UrQMD calculations for 0-5% and 70-80% central collisions and the HRG values are denoted by red dotted lines. The Poisson baseline is denoted by black dashed lines. Bars show statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors.
We present two-particle $p_{\rm t}$ correlations as a function of event centrality for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4, and 200 GeV at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider using the STAR detector. These results are compared to previous measurements from CERES at the Super Proton Synchrotron and from ALICE at the Large Hadron Collider. The data are compared with UrQMD model calculations and with a model based on a Boltzmann-Langevin approach incorporating effects from thermalization. The relative dynamical correlations for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV show a power law dependence on the number of participant nucleons and agree with the results for Pb+Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 2.76~ {\rm TeV}$ from ALICE. As the collision energy is lowered from $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV to 7.7 GeV, the centrality dependence of the relative dynamical correlations departs from the power law behavior observed at the higher collision energies. In central collisions, the relative dynamical correlations increase with collision energy up to $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV in contrast to previous measurements that showed little dependence on the collision energy.
'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'
'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'
'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'
'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'
'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'
'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'
'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'
'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'
'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'
'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'
'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'
'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'
New measurements of directed flow for charged hadrons, characterized by the Fourier coefficient \vone, are presented for transverse momenta $\mathrm{p_T}$, and centrality intervals in Au+Au collisions recorded by the STAR experiment for the center-of-mass energy range $\mathrm{\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}} = 7.7 - 200$ GeV. The measurements underscore the importance of momentum conservation and the characteristic dependencies on $\mathrm{\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}}$, centrality and $\mathrm{p_T}$ are consistent with the expectations of geometric fluctuations generated in the initial stages of the collision, acting in concert with a hydrodynamic-like expansion. The centrality and $\mathrm{p_T}$ dependencies of $\mathrm{v^{even}_{1}}$, as well as an observed similarity between its excitation function and that for $\mathrm{v_3}$, could serve as constraints for initial-state models. The $\mathrm{v^{even}_{1}}$ excitation function could also provide an important supplement to the flow measurements employed for precision extraction of the temperature dependence of the specific shear viscosity.
$v_{11}$ vs. $p_{T}^{b}$ for several selections of $p_{T}^{a}$ for 0-5 central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}} = 200$ GeV. The curve shows the result of the simultaneous fit.
Extracted values of $v^{even}_{1}$ vs. $p_{T}$ for 0-10 central Au+Au collisions for several values of $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}$ as indicated; the $v^{even}_{1}$ values are obtained via fits. The curve in panel (a) shows the result from a viscous hydrodynamically based predictions.
(a) Centrality dependence of $v^{even}_{1}$ for $0.4 \lt p_{T} \lt 0.7$ GeV/c for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}} = 200, 39$ and $19.6$ GeV; (b) $K$ vs. $\langle N_{ch} \rangle^{-1}$ for the $v^{even}_{1}$ values shown in (a). The $\langle N_{ch} \rangle$ values correspond to the centrality intervals indicated in panel (a).
(a) Centrality dependence of $v^{even}_{1}$ for $0.4 \lt p_{T} \lt 0.7$ GeV/c for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}} = 200, 39$ and $19.6$ GeV; (b) $K$ vs. $\langle N_{ch} \rangle^{-1}$ for the $v^{even}_{1}$ values shown in (a). The $\langle N_{ch} \rangle$ values correspond to the centrality intervals indicated in panel (a).
Comparison of the $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}$ dependence of $v^{even}_{1}$ and $v_3$ for $0.4 \lt p_{T} \lt 0.7$ GeV/c in 0-10 central Au+Au collisions.
Fluctuations of conserved quantities such as baryon number, charge, and strangeness are sensitive to the correlation length of the hot and dense matter created in relativistic heavy-ion collisions and can be used to search for the QCD critical point. We report the first measurements of the moments of net-kaon multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4, and 200 GeV. The collision centrality and energy dependence of the mean ($M$), variance ($\sigma^2$), skewness ($S$), and kurtosis ($\kappa$) for net-kaon multiplicity distributions as well as the ratio $\sigma^2/M$ and the products $S\sigma$ and $\kappa\sigma^2$ are presented. Comparisons are made with Poisson and negative binomial baseline calculations as well as with UrQMD, a transport model (UrQMD) that does not include effects from the QCD critical point. Within current uncertainties, the net-kaon cumulant ratios appear to be monotonic as a function of collision energy.
Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.
Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.
Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.
Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.
Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.
Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.
Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.
Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.
Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collisions energy dependence of $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ multiplicity distributions from 0–5% most central and 70–80% peripheral collisions in Au+Au collisions at \sqrt{s_{NN}} = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collisions energy dependence of $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ multiplicity distributions from 0–5% most central and 70–80% peripheral collisions in Au+Au collisions at \sqrt{s_{NN}} = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Collisions energy dependence of $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ multiplicity distributions from 0–5% most central and 70–80% peripheral collisions in Au+Au collisions at \sqrt{s_{NN}} = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.
Rapidity-odd directed flow measurements at midrapidity are presented for $\Lambda$, $\bar{\Lambda}$, $K^\pm$, $K^0_s$ and $\phi$ at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV in Au+Au collisions recorded by the STAR detector at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider. These measurements greatly expand the scope of data available to constrain models with differing prescriptions for the equation of state of quantum chromodynamics. Results show good sensitivity for testing a picture where flow is assumed to be imposed before hadron formation and the observed particles are assumed to form via coalescence of constituent quarks. The pattern of departure from a coalescence-inspired sum-rule can be a valuable new tool for probing the collision dynamics.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $p$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $p$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $p$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $p$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{p}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{p}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{p}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{p}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{+}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{+}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{+}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{+}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{-}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{-}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{-}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{-}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.
We report measurements of the nuclear modification factor, $R_{ \mathrm{CP}}$, for charged hadrons as well as identified $\pi^{+(-)}$, $K^{+(-)}$, and $p(\overline{p})$ for Au+Au collision energies of $\sqrt{s_{_{ \mathrm{NN}}}}$ = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 62.4 GeV. We observe a clear high-$p_{\mathrm{T}}$ net suppression in central collisions at 62.4 GeV for charged hadrons which evolves smoothly to a large net enhancement at lower energies. This trend is driven by the evolution of the pion spectra, but is also very similar for the kaon spectra. While the magnitude of the proton $R_{ \mathrm{CP}}$ at high $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ does depend on collision energy, neither the proton nor the anti-proton $R_{ \mathrm{CP}}$ at high $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ exhibit net suppression at any energy. A study of how the binary collision scaled high-$p_{\mathrm{T}}$ yield evolves with centrality reveals a non-monotonic shape that is consistent with the idea that jet-quenching is increasing faster than the combined phenomena that lead to enhancement.
Charged hadron RCP for RHIC BES energies. 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. The vertical uncertainty bars correspond to statistical uncertainties and the boxes to systematic uncertainties.
Identified particle (Pion 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 (Pion 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 (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
We present results on transverse momentum ($p_{\rm T}$) and rapidity ($y$) differential production cross sections, mean transverse momentum and mean transverse momentum square of inclusive J/$\psi$ and $\psi(2S)$ at forward rapidity ($2.5<y<4$) as well as $\psi(2S)$-to-J/$\psi$ cross section ratios. These quantities are measured in pp collisions at center of mass energies $\sqrt{s}=5.02$ and 13 TeV with the ALICE detector. Both charmonium states are reconstructed in the dimuon decay channel, using the muon spectrometer. A comprehensive comparison to inclusive charmonium cross sections measured at $\sqrt{s}=2.76$, 7 and 8 TeV is performed. A comparison to non-relativistic quantum chromodynamics and fixed-order next-to-leading logarithm calculations, which describe prompt and non-prompt charmonium production respectively, is also presented. A good description of the data is obtained over the full $p_{\rm T}$ range, provided that both contributions are summed. In particular, it is found that for $p_{\rm T}>15$ GeV/$c$ the non-prompt contribution reaches up to 50% of the total charmonium yield.
Differential production cross sections of $J/\psi$ as a function of $p_{\rm T}$.
Differential production cross sections of $J/\psi$ as a function of rapidity.
Differential production cross sections of $\psi(2S)$ as a function of $p_{\rm T}$.
Differential production cross sections of $\psi(2S)$ as a function of rapidity.
$\psi(2S)$ over $J/\psi$ ratio as a function of $p_{\rm T}$.
$\psi(2S)$ over $J/\psi$ ratio as a function of y.
Differential production cross sections of $J/\psi$ as a function of $p_{\rm T}$.
Differential production cross sections of $J/\psi$ as a function of rapidity.
$J/\psi$ mean transversee momentum vs collision energy. $p_{\rm T}$ integration ranges are 0<$p_{\rm T}$<8 GeV/$c$ at $\sqrt{s}$ =2700 GeV, 0<$p_{\rm T}$<12 GeV/$c$ at $\sqrt{s}$ =5020, 0<$p_{\rm T}$<20 GeV/$c$ at $\sqrt{s}$ =7000, 0<$p_{\rm T}$<20 GeV/$c$ at $\sqrt{s}$ =8000 and 0<$p_{\rm T}$<20 GeV/$c$ at $\sqrt{s}$ =13000.
$J/\psi$ mean transversee momentum square vs collision energy. $p_{\rm T}$ integration ranges are 0<$p_{\rm T}$<8 GeV/$c$ at $\sqrt{s}$ =2700 GeV, 0<$p_{\rm T}$<12 GeV/$c$ at $\sqrt{s}$ =5020, 0<$p_{\rm T}$<20 GeV/$c$ at $\sqrt{s}$ =7000, 0<$p_{\rm T}$<20 GeV/$c$ at $\sqrt{s}$ =8000 and 0<$p_{\rm T}$<20 GeV/$c$ at $\sqrt{s}$ =13000.
$\psi(2S)$ mean transversee momentum vs collision energy. $p_{\rm T}$ integration ranges are 0<$p_{\rm T}$<12 GeV/$c$ at $\sqrt{s}$ =7000, 0<$p_{\rm T}$<12 GeV/$c$ at $\sqrt{s}$ =8000 and 0<$p_{\rm T}$<16 GeV/$c$ at $\sqrt{s}$ =13000.
$\psi(2S)$ mean transversee momentum square vs collision energy. $p_{\rm T}$ integration ranges are 0<$p_{\rm T}$<12 GeV/$c$ at $\sqrt{s}$ =7000, 0<$p_{\rm T}$<12 GeV/$c$ at $\sqrt{s}$ =8000 and 0<$p_{\rm T}$<16 GeV/$c$ at $\sqrt{s}$ =13000.
Differential production cross sections of $J/\psi$ vs collision energy.
Differential production cross sections of $\psi(2S)$ vs collision energy.
We present measurements of bulk properties of the matter produced in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 7.7, 11.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV using identified hadrons ($\pi^\pm$, $K^\pm$, $p$ and $\bar{p}$) from the STAR experiment in the Beam Energy Scan (BES) Program at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC). Midrapidity ($|y|<$0.1) results for multiplicity densities $dN/dy$, average transverse momenta $\langle p_T \rangle$ and particle ratios are presented. The chemical and kinetic freeze-out dynamics at these energies are discussed and presented as a function of collision centrality and energy. These results constitute the systematic measurements of bulk properties of matter formed in heavy-ion collisions over a broad range of energy (or baryon chemical potential) at RHIC.
The average number of participating nucleons (⟨Npart⟩) for various collision centralities in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7–39 GeV.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (b) π- in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (a) π+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (d) K− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (c) K+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (f) p¯ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (e) p in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (b) π− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (a) π+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (d) K− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (c) K+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (f) p¯ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (e) p in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (b) π− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (a) π+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (d) K− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (c) K+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (f) p¯ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (e) p in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (b) π− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (a) π+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (d) K− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (c) K+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (f) p¯ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (e) p in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (b) π− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (a) π+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (d) k- in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (c) k+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (f) pbar in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (e) p in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.
Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For clarity, ⟨Npart⟩ uncertainties are not added in quadrature.
Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For clarity, ⟨Npart⟩ uncertainties are not added in quadrature.
Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For clarity, ⟨Npart⟩ uncertainties are not added in quadrature.
Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For clarity, ⟨Npart⟩ uncertainties are not added in quadrature.
Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For clarity, ⟨Npart⟩ uncertainties are not added in quadrature.
Centrality dependences of <pT> for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV. Errors shown are quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
Centrality dependences of <pT> for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV. Errors shown are quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
Centrality dependences of <pT> for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV. Errors shown are quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
Centrality dependences of <pT> for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV. Errors shown are quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
Centrality dependences of <pT> for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV. Errors shown are quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
Variation of π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
Variation of π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
Variation of π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
Variation of π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
Variation of π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
Variation of K−/π−, p ̄/π−, K+/π+, and p/π+ ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
Variation of K−/π−, p ̄/π−, K+/π+, and p/π+ ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
Variation of K−/π−, p ̄/π−, K+/π+, and p/π+ ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
Variation of K−/π−, p ̄/π−, K+/π+, and p/π+ ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
Variation of K−/π−, p ̄/π−, K+/π+, and p/π+ ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
The midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 as a function of √sNN for π±, K±, and p and p ̄ in 0–5% Au+Au collisions at BES energies. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
⟨mT⟩ − m of π±, K±, and p and p ̄ as a function of √sNN . Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) results are shown for 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at BES energies. The errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in central 0–5% Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
K/π ratio at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) for central 0–5% Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.
The GCE model particle yields fits shown along with standard deviations for Au+Au 7.7 and Au+Au 39 GeV in 0–5% central collisions. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
The GCE model particle ratios fits shown along with standard deviations for Au+Au 7.7 and Au+Au 39 GeV in 0–5% central collisions. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
The SCE model particle yields fits shown along with standard deviations for Au+Au 7.7 and Au+Au 39 GeV in 0–5% central collisions. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
The SCE model particle ratios fits shown along with standard deviations for Au+Au 7.7 and Au+Au 39 GeV in 0–5% central collisions. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Chemical freeze-out parameter γS plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in GCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Chemical freeze-out parameter μB plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in GCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Chemical freeze-out parameter μS plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in GCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Chemical freeze-out parameter Tch plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in GCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Chemical freeze-out parameter R plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in GCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter γS between results from particle yield fits to particle ratio fits in GCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter μB between results from particle yield fits to particle ratio fits in GCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter μS between results from particle yield fits to particle ratio fits in GCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter Tch between results from particle yield fits to particle ratio fits in GCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Chemical freeze-out parameter γS plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in SCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Chemical freeze-out parameter μB plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in SCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Chemical freeze-out parameter Tch plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in SCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Chemical freeze-out parameter R plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in SCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter γS between yield and ratio fits in SCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter μB between yield and ratio fits in SCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter Tch between yield and ratio fits in SCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter γS between GCE and SCE results using particle ratios in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter μB between GCE and SCE results using particle ratios in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter Tch between GCE and SCE results using particle ratios in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter γS between GCE and SCE results using particle yields in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter μB between GCE and SCE results using particle yields in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter Tch between GCE and SCE results using particle yields in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter R between GCE and SCE results using particle yields in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Extracted chemical freeze-out temperature vs baryon chemical potential for (a) GCE and (b) SCE cases using particle yields as input for fitting. Curves represent two model predictions [81,82]. The gray bands represent the theoretical prediction ranges of the Cleymans et al. model [81]. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Extracted chemical freeze-out temperature vs baryon chemical potential for (a) GCE and (b) SCE cases using particle yields as input for fitting. Curves represent two model predictions [81,82]. The gray bands represent the theoretical prediction ranges of the Cleymans et al. model [81]. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
Extracted chemical freeze-out temperature vs baryon chemical potential for (a) GCE and (b) SCE cases using particle yields as input for fitting. Curves represent two model predictions [81,82]. The gray bands represent the theoretical prediction ranges of the Cleymans et al. model [81]. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.
"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."
"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."
"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."
"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."
"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."
"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."
"Choice on including more particles: Extracted chemical freeze-out parameters (a) Tch, (b) μB, and (c) γS along with (d) χ2/ndf for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting. Results are compared for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for four different sets of particle yields used in fitting. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."
"Choice on including more particles: Extracted chemical freeze-out parameters (a) Tch, (b) μB, and (c) γS along with (d) χ2/ndf for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting. Results are compared for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for four different sets of particle yields used in fitting. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."
"Choice on including more particles: Extracted chemical freeze-out parameters (a) Tch, (b) μB, and (c) γS along with (d) χ2/ndf for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting. Results are compared for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for four different sets of particle yields used in fitting. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."
"Choice on including more particles: Extracted chemical freeze-out parameters (a) Tch, (b) μB, and (c) γS along with (d) χ2/ndf for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting. Results are compared for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for four different sets of particle yields used in fitting. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."
"Blast wave model fits of π±, K±, p and p p¯ T spectra in 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = (a) 7.7, (b) 11.5, (c) 19.6, (d) 27, and (e) 39 GeV. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature. Here, the uncertainties are smaller than the symbol size."
"Blast wave model fits of π±, K±, p and p p¯ T spectra in 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = (a) 7.7, (b) 11.5, (c) 19.6, (d) 27, and (e) 39 GeV. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature. Here, the uncertainties are smaller than the symbol size."
"Blast wave model fits of π±, K±, p and p p¯ T spectra in 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = (a) 7.7, (b) 11.5, (c) 19.6, (d) 27, and (e) 39 GeV. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature. Here, the uncertainties are smaller than the symbol size."
"Blast wave model fits of π±, K±, p and p p¯ T spectra in 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = (a) 7.7, (b) 11.5, (c) 19.6, (d) 27, and (e) 39 GeV. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature. Here, the uncertainties are smaller than the symbol size."
"Blast wave model fits of π±, K±, p and p p¯ T spectra in 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = (a) 7.7, (b) 11.5, (c) 19.6, (d) 27, and (e) 39 GeV. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature. Here, the uncertainties are smaller than the symbol size."
"Variation of Tkin with <β> for different energies and centralities. The centrality increases from left to right for a given energy. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,66]. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."
"Variation of Tkin with <β> for different energies and centralities. The centrality increases from left to right for a given energy. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,66]. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."
"Variation of Tkin with <β> for different energies and centralities. The centrality increases from left to right for a given energy. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,66]. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."
"Variation of Tkin with <β> for different energies and centralities. The centrality increases from left to right for a given energy. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,66]. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."
"Variation of Tkin with <β> for different energies and centralities. The centrality increases from left to right for a given energy. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,66]. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."
" (a) Energy dependence of kinetic and chemical freezeout temperatures for central heavy-ion collisions. The curves represent various theoretical predictions [81,82]. (b) Energy dependence of average transverse radial flow velocity for central heavy-ion collisions. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,53–64,66] and references therein. The BES data points are for 0–5% central collisions, AGS energies are mostly for 0–5%, SPS energies are for mostly 0–7%, and top RHIC and LHC energies are for 0–5% central collisions. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."
The extreme temperatures and energy densities generated by ultra-relativistic collisions between heavy nuclei produce a state of matter with surprising fluid properties. Non-central collisions have angular momentum on the order of 1000$\hbar$, and the resulting fluid may have a strong vortical structure that must be understood to properly describe the fluid. It is also of particular interest because the restoration of fundamental symmetries of quantum chromodynamics is expected to produce novel physical effects in the presence of strong vorticity. However, no experimental indications of fluid vorticity in heavy ion collisions have so far been found. Here we present the first measurement of an alignment between the angular momentum of a non-central collision and the spin of emitted particles, revealing that the fluid produced in heavy ion collisions is by far the most vortical system ever observed. We find that $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ hyperons show a positive polarization of the order of a few percent, consistent with some hydrodynamic predictions. A previous measurement that reported a null result at higher collision energies is seen to be consistent with the trend of our new observations, though with larger statistical uncertainties. These data provide the first experimental access to the vortical structure of the "perfect fluid" created in a heavy ion collision. They should prove valuable in the development of hydrodynamic models that quantitatively connect observations to the theory of the Strong Force. Our results extend the recent discovery of hydrodynamic spin alignment to the subatomic realm.
Lambda and AntiLambda polarization as a function of collision energy. A 0.8% error on the alpha value used in the paper is corrected in this table. Systematic error bars include those associated with particle identification (negligible), uncertainty in the value of the hyperon decay parameter (2%) and reaction plane resolution (2%) and detector efficiency corrections (4%). The dominant systematic error comes from statistical fluctuations of the estimated combinatoric background under the (anti-)$\Lambda$ mass peak.
Lambda and AntiLambda polarization as a function of collision energy calculated using the new $\alpha_\Lambda=0.732$ updated on PDG2020. Systematic error bars include those associated with particle identification (negligible), uncertainty in the value of the hyperon decay parameter (2%) and reaction plane resolution (2%) and detector efficiency corrections (4%). The dominant systematic error comes from statistical fluctuations of the estimated combinatoric background under the (anti-)$\Lambda$ mass peak.
We present measurements of three-particle correlations for various harmonics in Au+Au collisions at energies ranging from $\sqrt{s_{{\rm NN}}}=7.7$ to 200 GeV using the STAR detector. The quantity $\langle\cos(m\phi_1+n\phi_2-(m+n)\phi_3)\rangle$ is evaluated as a function of $\sqrt{s_{{\rm NN}}}$, collision centrality, transverse momentum, $p_T$, pseudo-rapidity difference, $\Delta\eta$, and harmonics ($m$ and $n$). These data provide detailed information on global event properties like the three-dimensional structure of the initial overlap region, the expansion dynamics of the matter produced in the collisions, and the transport properties of the medium. A strong dependence on $\Delta\eta$ is observed for most harmonic combinations consistent with breaking of longitudinal boost invariance. Data reveal changes with energy in the two-particle correlation functions relative to the second-harmonic event-plane and provide ways to constrain models of heavy-ion collisions over a wide range of collision energies.
The centrality dependence of the C$_{m,n,m+n}$ correlations versus N$_{part}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$ from 200 GeV Au+Au collisions.
The centrality dependence of the C$_{m,n,m+n}$ correlations versus N$_{part}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$ from 62.4 GeV Au+Au collisions.
The centrality dependence of the C$_{m,n,m+n}$ correlations versus N$_{part}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$ from 39 GeV Au+Au collisions.
The centrality dependence of the C$_{m,n,m+n}$ correlations versus N$_{part}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$ from 27 GeV Au+Au collisions.
The centrality dependence of the C$_{m,n,m+n}$ correlations versus N$_{part}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$ from 19.6 GeV Au+Au collisions.
The centrality dependence of the C$_{m,n,m+n}$ correlations versus N$_{part}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$ from 14.5 GeV Au+Au collisions.
The centrality dependence of the C$_{m,n,m+n}$ correlations versus N$_{part}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$ from 11.5 GeV Au+Au collisions.
The centrality dependence of the C$_{m,n,m+n}$ correlations versus N$_{part}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$ from 7.7 GeV Au+Au collisions.
Three-particle azimuthal correlations C$_{1,1,2}$ as a function of the first particles p$_{T}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$.
Three-particle azimuthal correlations C$_{1,2,3}$ as a function of the particle one p$_{T}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$.
Three-particle azimuthal correlations C$_{1,2,3}$ as a function of the particle two p$_{T}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$.
Three-particle azimuthal correlations C$_{2,2,4}$ as a function of the first particles p$_{T}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$.
Three-particle azimuthal correlations C$_{2,3,5}$ as a function of the particle one p$_{T}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$.
Three-particle azimuthal correlations C$_{2,3,5}$ as a function of the particle two p$_{T}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$.
The $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ and centrality dependence of $v_{1}\{2\}^2$ after short-range correlations,predominantly from quantum and Coulomb effects, have been subtracted.
The $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ and centrality dependence of $v_{2}\{2\}^2$ after short-range correlations,predominantly from quantum and Coulomb effects, have been subtracted.
The $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ and centrality dependence of $v_{4}\{2\}^2$ after short-range correlations,predominantly from quantum and Coulomb effects, have been subtracted.
The $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ and centrality dependence of $v_{5}\{2\}^2$ after short-range correlations,predominantly from quantum and Coulomb effects, have been subtracted.
The inclusive $J/\psi$ transverse momentum ($p_{T}$) spectra and nuclear modification factors are reported at midrapidity ($|y|<1.0$) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV taken by the STAR experiment. A suppression of $J/\psi$ production, with respect to {\color{black}the production in $p+p$ scaled by the number of binary nucleon-nucleon collisions}, is observed in central Au+Au collisions at these three energies. No significant energy dependence of nuclear modification factors is found within uncertainties. The measured nuclear modification factors can be described by model calculations that take into account both suppression of direct $J/\psi$ production due to the color screening effect and $J/\psi$ regeneration from recombination of uncorrelated charm-anticharm quark pairs.
J/psi invariant yields in Au+Au collisions = 39 GeV as a function of pT for different centralities.
J/psi invariant yields in Au+Au collisions = 62.4 GeV as a function of pT for different centralities.
J/psi invariant yields in Au+Au collisions = 200 GeV as a function of pT for different centralities.
J/psi RCP results (with respect to 40−60% peripheral) for Au+Au collisions (39, 62.4 and 200 GeV) as a function of Npart.
J/psi RCP results for Au+Au collisions (39, 62.4 and 200 GeV) as a function of Npart.
J/psi RCP results for Au+Au collisions (39, 62.4 and 200 GeV) as a function of pT.
We present measurements of 2$^{nd}$ order azimuthal anisotropy ($v_{2}$) at mid-rapidity $(|y|<1.0)$ for light nuclei d, t, $^{3}$He (for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200, 62.4, 39, 27, 19.6, 11.5, and 7.7 GeV) and anti-nuclei $\bar{\rm d}$ ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200, 62.4, 39, 27, and 19.6 GeV) and $^{3}\bar{\rm He}$ ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV) in the STAR (Solenoidal Tracker at RHIC) experiment. The $v_{2}$ for these light nuclei produced in heavy-ion collisions is compared with those for p and $\bar{\rm p}$. We observe mass ordering in nuclei $v_{2}(p_{T})$ at low transverse momenta ($p_{T}<2.0$ GeV/$c$). We also find a centrality dependence of $v_{2}$ for d and $\bar{\rm d}$. The magnitude of $v_{2}$ for t and $^{3}$He agree within statistical errors. Light-nuclei $v_{2}$ are compared with predictions from a blast wave model. Atomic mass number ($A$) scaling of light-nuclei $v_{2}(p_{T})$ seems to hold for $p_{T}/A < 1.5$ GeV/$c$. Results on light-nuclei $v_{2}$ from a transport-plus-coalescence model are consistent with the experimental measurements.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) for d,anti-d,t,He,anti-He from minimum bias (0-80%) Au+Au collisions 200 GeV (d data points are also shown in Fig 5).
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) for d,anti-d,t,He from minimum bias (0-80%) Au+Au collisions 62.4 GeV.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) for d,anti-d,t,He from minimum bias (0-80%) Au+Au collisions 39 GeV.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) for d,anti-d,t,He from minimum bias (0-80%) Au+Au collisions 27 GeV.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) for d,anti-d,t,He from minimum bias (0-80%) Au+Au collisions 19.6 GeV.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) for d,t,He from minimum bias (0-80%) Au+Au collisions 11.5 GeV.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) for d,t,He from minimum bias (0-80%) Au+Au collisions 7.7 GeV.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) difference for d-dbar in minimum bias (0-80%) Au+Au collisions 200 GeV.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) difference for d-dbar in minimum bias (0-80%) Au+Au collisions 62.4 GeV.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) difference for d-dbar in minimum bias (0-80%) Au+Au collisions 39 GeV.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) difference for d-dbar in minimum bias (0-80%) Au+Au collisions 27 GeV.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) difference for d-dbar in minimum bias (0-80%) Au+Au collisions 19.6 GeV.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) for d and anti-d for 0-10%, 10-40% and 40-80% in Au+Au collisions 200 GeV.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) for d and anti-d for 0-30% and 30-80% in Au+Au collisions 62.4 GeV.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) for d and anti-d for 0-30% and 30-80% in Au+Au collisions 39 GeV.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) for d and anti-d for 0-30% and 30-80% in Au+Au collisions 27 GeV.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) for d 0-30% and 30-80% in Au+Au collisions 19.6 GeV.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) for d 0-30% and 30-80% in Au+Au collisions 11.5 GeV.
Mid-rapidity v2(pT) for d 0-30% and 30-80% in Au+Au collisions 7.7 GeV.
We present results from a harmonic decomposition of two-particle azimuthal correlations measured with the STAR detector in Au+Au collisions for energies ranging from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=7.7$ GeV to 200 GeV. The third harmonic $v_3^2\{2\}=\langle \cos3(\phi_1-\phi_2)\rangle$, where $\phi_1-\phi_2$ is the angular difference in azimuth, is studied as a function of the pseudorapidity difference between particle pairs $\Delta\eta = \eta_1-\eta_2$. Non-zero {\vthree} is directly related to the previously observed large-$\Delta\eta$ narrow-$\Delta\phi$ ridge correlations and has been shown in models to be sensitive to the existence of a low viscosity Quark Gluon Plasma (QGP) phase. For sufficiently central collisions, $v_3^2\{2\}$ persist down to an energy of 7.7 GeV suggesting that QGP may be created even in these low energy collisions. In peripheral collisions at these low energies however, $v_3^2\{2\}$ is consistent with zero. When scaled by pseudorapidity density of charged particle multiplicity per participating nucleon pair, $v_3^2\{2\}$ for central collisions shows a minimum near {\snn}$=20$ GeV.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Representative results on $v_3^2\{2\}$ from Au+Au collisions as a function of $\Delta\eta$ for charged hadrons with pT > 0.2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.
Npart values are for the corresponding centrality at 200 GeV.
Npart values are for the corresponding centrality at 200 GeV.
Npart values are for the corresponding centrality at 200 GeV.
Npart values are for the corresponding centrality at 200 GeV.
Npart values are for the corresponding centrality at 200 GeV.
Npart values are for the corresponding centrality at 200 GeV.
Npart values are for the corresponding centrality at 200 GeV.
Npart values are for the corresponding centrality at 200 GeV.
No description provided.
Elliptic flow (v_2) values for identified particles at midrapidity in Au + Au collisions measured by the STAR experiment in the Beam Energy Scan at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at sqrt{s_{NN}}= 7.7--62.4 GeV are presented for three centrality classes. The centrality dependence and the data at sqrt{s_{NN}}= 14.5 GeV are new. Except at the lowest beam energies we observe a similar relative v_2 baryon-meson splitting for all centrality classes which is in agreement within 15% with the number-of-constituent quark scaling. The larger v_2 for most particles relative to antiparticles, already observed for minimum bias collisions, shows a clear centrality dependence, with the largest difference for the most central collisions. Also, the results are compared with A Multiphase Transport Model and fit with a Blast Wave model.
No description provided.
The difference in $v_{2}$ between particles (X) and their corresponding antiparticles $\bar{X}$ (see legend) as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ for 10%-40% central Au + Au collisions. The systematic errors are shown by the hooked error bars. The dashed lines in the plot are fits with a power-law function.
No description provided.
The difference in $v_{2}$ between protons and antiprotons as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ for 0%-10%, 10%-40% and 40%-80% central Au + Au collisions. The systematic errors are shown by the hooked error bars. The dashed lines in the plot are fits with a power-law function.
No description provided.
The relative difference. The systematic errors are shown by the hooked error bars. The dashed lines in the plot are fits with a power-law function.
No description provided.
The $v_{2}$ difference between protons and antiprotons (and between $\pi^{+}$ and $pi^{-}$) for 10%-40% centrality Au+Au collisions at 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, and 19.6 GeV. The $v_{2}{BBC} results were slightly shifted horizontally.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
Balance functions have been measured in terms of relative pseudorapidity ($\Delta \eta$) for charged particle pairs at the Relativistic Heavy-Ion Collider (RHIC) from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV to 200 GeV using the STAR detector. These results are compared with balance functions measured at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) from Pb+Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 2.76 TeV by the ALICE Collaboration. The width of the balance function decreases as the collisions become more central and as the beam energy is increased. In contrast, the widths of the balance functions calculated using shuffled events show little dependence on centrality or beam energy and are larger than the observed widths. Balance function widths calculated using events generated by UrQMD are wider than the measured widths in central collisions and show little centrality dependence. The measured widths of the balance functions in central collisions are consistent with the delayed hadronization of a deconfined quark gluon plasma (QGP). The narrowing of the balance function in central collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV implies that a QGP is still being created at this relatively low energy.
The balance function in terms of $\Delta \eta$ for all charged particles with $0.2 < p_{T} < 2.0$ GeV/$c$ from central Au+Au collisions (0-5%) for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=7.7$ GeV. The data are the measured balance functions corrected by subtracting balance functions calculated using mixed events. Also shown are balance functions calculated using shuffled events.
The balance function in terms of $\Delta \eta$ for all charged particles with $0.2 < p_{T} < 2.0$ GeV/$c$ from central Au+Au collisions (0-5%) for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=11.5$ GeV. The data are the measured balance functions corrected by subtracting balance functions calculated using mixed events. Also shown are balance functions calculated using shuffled events.
The balance function in terms of $\Delta \eta$ for all charged particles with $0.2 < p_{T} < 2.0$ GeV/$c$ from central Au+Au collisions (0-5%) for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=19.6$ GeV. The data are the measured balance functions corrected by subtracting balance functions calculated using mixed events. Also shown are balance functions calculated using shuffled events.
The balance function in terms of $\Delta \eta$ for all charged particles with $0.2 < p_{T} < 2.0$ GeV/$c$ from central Au+Au collisions (0-5%) for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=27$ GeV. The data are the measured balance functions corrected by subtracting balance functions calculated using mixed events. Also shown are balance functions calculated using shuffled events.
The balance function in terms of $\Delta \eta$ for all charged particles with $0.2 < p_{T} < 2.0$ GeV/$c$ from central Au+Au collisions (0-5%) for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=39$ GeV. The data are the measured balance functions corrected by subtracting balance functions calculated using mixed events. Also shown are balance functions calculated using shuffled events.
The balance function in terms of $\Delta \eta$ for all charged particles with $0.2 < p_{T} < 2.0$ GeV/$c$ from central Au+Au collisions (0-5%) for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=62.4$ GeV. The data are the measured balance functions corrected by subtracting balance functions calculated using mixed events. Also shown are balance functions calculated using shuffled events.
The balance function in terms of $\Delta \eta$ for all charged particles with $0.2 < p_{T} < 2.0$ GeV/$c$ from central Au+Au collisions (0-5%) for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=200$ GeV. The data are the measured balance functions corrected by subtracting balance functions calculated using mixed events. Also shown are balance functions calculated using shuffled events.
Energy dependence of the balance function widths compared with the widths of the balance functions calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are the balance function widths calculated using UrQMD. The dashed line represents the width of the balance function calculated using shuffled events for a constant $dN/d\eta$ distribution. Error bars represent the statistical error and the shaded bands represent the systematic error.
Energy dependence of the balance function widths compared with the widths of the balance functions calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are the balance function widths calculated using UrQMD. The dashed line represents the width of the balance function calculated using shuffled events for a constant $dN/d\eta$ distribution. Error bars represent the statistical error and the shaded bands represent the systematic error.
Energy dependence of the balance function widths compared with the widths of the balance functions calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are the balance function widths calculated using UrQMD. The dashed line represents the width of the balance function calculated using shuffled events for a constant $dN/d\eta$ distribution. Error bars represent the statistical error and the shaded bands represent the systematic error.
Energy dependence of the balance function widths compared with the widths of the balance functions calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are the balance function widths calculated using UrQMD. The dashed line represents the width of the balance function calculated using shuffled events for a constant $dN/d\eta$ distribution. Error bars represent the statistical error and the shaded bands represent the systematic error.
Energy dependence of the balance function widths compared with the widths of the balance functions calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are the balance function widths calculated using UrQMD. The dashed line represents the width of the balance function calculated using shuffled events for a constant $dN/d\eta$ distribution. Error bars represent the statistical error and the shaded bands represent the systematic error.
Energy dependence of the balance function widths compared with the widths of the balance functions calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are the balance function widths calculated using UrQMD. The dashed line represents the width of the balance function calculated using shuffled events for a constant $dN/d\eta$ distribution. Error bars represent the statistical error and the shaded bands represent the systematic error.
Energy dependence of the balance function widths compared with the widths of the balance functions calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are the balance function widths calculated using UrQMD. The dashed line represents the width of the balance function calculated using shuffled events for a constant $dN/d\eta$ distribution. Error bars represent the statistical error and the shaded bands represent the systematic error.
Balance function widths for the most central events ($0-5\%$) compared with balance function widths calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are balance function widths calculated using UrQMD and shuffled UrQMD events. The dashed line represents the width of the balance function calculated using shuffled events for a constant $dN/d\eta$ distribution.
Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.
Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.
Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.
Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.
Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.
Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.
Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.
Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.
Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ normalized to the most peripheral centrality bin compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.
Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ normalized to the most peripheral centrality bin compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.
Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ normalized to the most peripheral centrality bin compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.
Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ normalized to the most peripheral centrality bin compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.
Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ normalized to the most peripheral centrality bin compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.
Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ normalized to the most peripheral centrality bin compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.
Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ normalized to the most peripheral centrality bin compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.
Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ normalized to the most peripheral centrality bin compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.
When you search on a word, e.g. 'collisions', we will automatically search across everything we store about a record. But sometimes you may wish to be more specific. Here we show you how.
Guidance on the query string syntax can also be found in the OpenSearch documentation.
About HEPData Submitting to HEPData HEPData File Formats HEPData Coordinators HEPData Terms of Use HEPData Cookie Policy
Status Email Forum Twitter GitHub
Copyright ~1975-Present, HEPData | Powered by Invenio, funded by STFC, hosted and originally developed at CERN, supported and further developed at IPPP Durham.