FIG. 2: a) left side: The correlation data for the ratio of the histograms of same-event-pairs to mixed-event-pairs for unlike-sign charged pairs, shown in a two-dimensional (2-D) perspective plot $\Delta\phi$ - $\Delta\eta$. The plot was normalized to a mean of 1. b) right side: The similar correlation data for like-sign charge pairs.

FIG. 3: a) left side: Folded correlation data for unlike-sign charge pairs on $\Delta\phi$ and $\Delta\eta$ based on demonstrated symmetries in the data. This increases the statistics in a typical bin by a factor of four. Henceforth we will be dealing with folded data only. b) right side: Similar folded data for like-sign charge pairs.

FIG. 3: a) left side: Folded correlation data for unlike-sign charge pairs on $\Delta\phi$ and $\Delta\eta$ based on demonstrated symmetries in the data. This increases the statistics in a typical bin by a factor of four. Henceforth we will be dealing with folded data only. b) right side: Similar folded data for like-sign charge pairs.

FIG. 4: “(Color online)”a) left side: The 2 dimensional (2-D) approximately gaussian signal shape equation (4) from the fit to the normalized and folded unlike-sign charge pairs signal data. b) right side: The unlike-sign charge pairs signal data corresponding to the adjoining signal function on the left side.

FIG. 4: “(Color online)”a) left side: The 2 dimensional (2-D) approximately gaussian signal shape equation (4) from the fit to the normalized and folded unlike-sign charge pairs signal data. b) right side: The unlike-sign charge pairs signal data corresponding to the adjoining signal function on the left side.

FIG. 5 :“(Color online)”a) left side: A perspective plot of the fit to the 2-D like-sign charge pairs signal shape of equation (5). b) right side: Like-sign charge pairs signal data corresponding to the adjacent signal fit on the left side.

FIG. 5: “(Color online)”a) left side: A perspective plot of the fit to the 2-D like-sign charge pairs signal shape of equation (5). b) right side: Like-sign charge pairs signal data corresponding to the adjacent signal fit on the left side.

FIG. 6: “(Color online)”a) left side: The charge dependent (CD) signal shape is a 2 dimensional (2-D) approximate gaussian which is symmetrical. The average gaussian width is 27.5$^{\circ}$ $\pm$ 3.2$^{\circ}$ (0.48 $\pm$ 0.056 rad) both in $\Delta\phi$ and $\Delta\eta$. Thus we are observing a greater probability for unlike-sign charge pairs of particles than for like-sign charge pairs emitted randomly on 2-D $\eta\phi$ directions. b) right side: The CD signal data corresponding to the adjacent signal fit on the left.

FIG. 6: “(Color online)”a) left side: The charge dependent (CD) signal shape is a 2 dimensional (2-D) approximate gaussian which is symmetrical. The average gaussian width is 27.5$^{\circ}$ $\pm$ 3.2$^{\circ}$ (0.48 $\pm$ 0.056 rad) both in $\Delta\phi$ and $\Delta\eta$. Thus we are observing a greater probability for unlike-sign charge pairs of particles than for like-sign charge pairs emitted randomly on 2-D $\eta\phi$ directions. b) right side: The CD signal data corresponding to the adjacent signal fit on the left.

FIG. 7: “(Color online)”a) left side: The fit to the charge independent (CI) signal shape which is the sum of the fits of like-sign plus unlike-sign charge pairs signals. The 2-D gaussian equivalent RMS signal has a $\Delta\phi$ width of about 32$^{\circ}$ (0.52 rad), and $\Delta\eta$ width of about 66$^{\circ}$ (1.15 rad) which is about double the $\Delta\phi$ width. b) right side: The CI signal data corresponding to the adjacent fit on the left.

FIG. 7: “(Color online)”a) left side: The fit to the charge independent (CI) signal shape which is the sum of the fits of like-sign plus unlike-sign charge pairs signals. The 2-D gaussian equivalent RMS signal has a $\Delta\phi$ width of about 32$^{\circ}$ (0.52 rad), and $\Delta\eta$ width of about 66$^{\circ}$ (1.15 rad) which is about double the $\Delta\phi$ width. b) right side: The CI signal data corresponding to the adjacent fit on the left.

FIG. 8: a) left side: The charge independent (CI) signal data with the lower range of elliptic flow amplitude and the best $\chi^2$ (the same as Figure 7b) plotted as a 2-D perspective plot on $\Delta\phi$ vs. $\Delta\eta$. b) right side: The charge independent (CI) signal data with our maximum elliptic flow amplitude used in our analysis ($\chi^2$ was worse by 1$\sigma$).

FIG. 8: a) left side: The charge independent (CI) signal data with the lower range of elliptic flow amplitude and the best $\chi^2$ (the same as Figure 7b) plotted as a 2-D perspective plot on $\Delta\phi$ vs. $\Delta\eta$. b) right side: The charge independent (CI) signal data with our maximum elliptic flow amplitude used in our analysis ($\chi^2$ was worse by 1$\sigma$).

The $v_{dyn}$ and the three terms of $v_{dyn}$ vs $\sqrt{\langle N_{ch}\rangle \langle N_{\gamma}\rangle }$ for mixed events. $Corr_{\gamma\,-ch}^{real}$ is plotted.

The $v_{dyn}$ and the three terms of $v_{dyn}$ vs $\sqrt{\langle N_{ch}\rangle \langle N_{\gamma}\rangle }$ for mixed events. $Corr_{\gamma\,-ch}^{mixed}$ is plotted.

The $v_{dyn}$ and the three terms of $v_{dyn}$ vs $\sqrt{\langle N_{ch}\rangle \langle N_{\gamma}\rangle }$ for mixed events. $\omega_{\gamma}^{real}$ is plotted.

The $v_{dyn}$ and the three terms of $v_{dyn}$ vs $\sqrt{\langle N_{ch}\rangle \langle N_{\gamma}\rangle }$ for mixed events. $\omega_{\gamma}^{mixed}$ is plotted.

The $v_{dyn}$ and the three terms of $v_{dyn}$ vs $\sqrt{\langle N_{ch}\rangle \langle N_{\gamma}\rangle }$ for mixed events. $v_{dyn}^{real}$ is plotted.

The $v_{dyn}$ and the three terms of $v_{dyn}$ vs $\sqrt{\langle N_{ch}\rangle \langle N_{\gamma}\rangle }$ for mixed events. $v_{dyn}^{mixed}$ is plotted.

The values of the observable $v_{dyn}^{ch-\gamma}$ for the same side.

The values of the observable $v_{dyn}^{ch-\gamma}$ for the same side.

The values of the observable $v_{dyn}^{ch-\gamma}$ for the away-side.

The values of the observable $v_{dyn}^{ch-\gamma}$ for the away-side.

The correlation between positive and negative charged particles measured by the FTPC and photons measured by the PMD using $v_{dyn}$ for real events.

$r_{m,1}$ vs multiplicity for first order of m.

$r_{m,1}$ vs multiplicity for first order of m.

$r_{m,1}$ vs multiplicity for second order of m.

$r_{m,1}$ vs multiplicity for second order of m.

$r_{m,1}$ vs multiplicity for third order of m.

$r_{m,1}$ vs multiplicity for third order of m.

The moments $r_{m,1}$(m=1-3) for real and mixed events as a function of order m in a fixed multiplicity bin of 47$\langle \sqrt{\langle N_{ch}\rangle \langle N_{\gamma}\rangle }\langle 54$.

Non photonic electrons yield versus transverse momentum in D+AU collisions.

Non photonic electrons yield versus transverse momentum in P+P collisions.

D0 differential yield at mid rapidity and corresponding calculated differential charm cross section at midrapidity.

Sum of the non photonic electrons/positrons and D0 differential yield at mid rapidity and corresponding calculated differential charm cross section at midrapidity.

Total charm cross section per nucleon nucleon collision IN D+AU collisions.

PHI to K*0 ratio measured in this study.

xT scaling (with xT.

J/psi nuclear modification factor RAA from sqrt(s).

J/psi nuclear modification factor RAA from sqrt(s).

J/psi-hadron azimuthal correlations in sqrt(s).

Contribution from B-hadron feed-down to inclusive J/psi production in sqrt(s).

The $\Lambda\Lambda$ interaction parameters from this experiment.

Inclusive jet $A_{LL}$ vs. parton jet $p_T$ for 0.5<|eta|<1.0.

The uncertainties on the parton jet pT values are strongly correlated across the bins. The point-to-point statistical and systematic uncertainties on the measured A_LL values given above are only weakly correlated among the bins. The correlation matrix for the quadrature sum of the point-to-point statistical and systematic uncertainties is given below. In that matrix, the order of the rows and columns matches the bin numbering above. In addition to the point-to-point statistical and systematic uncertainties, there are two systematic uncertainties that are common to all the measured A_LL values (and not included in the systematic uncertainty numbers quoted above): (a) +/-0.0005 vertical shift uncertainty from relative luminosity and (b) +/-6.5% vertical scale uncertainty from polarization.

$A_{LL}$ model predictions for |eta|<0.5.

$A_{LL}$ model predictions for 0.5<|eta|<1.0.

Two-dimensional $\Delta\phi$ vs. $\Delta\eta$ correlation functions for non-pion triggers from 0-10% most-central Au+Au data at 200 GeV. All trigger and associated charged hadrons are selected in the respective pT ranges 4 < $p_T^{trig}$ < 5 GeV/c and 1.5 < $p_T^{assoc}$ < 4 GeV/c.

Two-dimensional $\Delta\phi$ vs. $\Delta\eta$ correlation functions for pion triggers from minimum-bias d+Au data at 200 GeV. All trigger and associated charged hadrons are selected in the respective pT ranges 4 < $p_T^{trig}$ < 5 GeV/c and 1.5 < $p_T^{assoc}$ < 4 GeV/c.

Two-dimensional $\Delta\phi$ vs. $\Delta\eta$ correlation functions for pion triggers from 0-10% most-central Au+Au data at 200 GeV. All trigger and associated charged hadrons are selected in the respective pT ranges 4 < $p_T^{trig}$ < 5 GeV/c and 1.5 < $p_T^{assoc}$ < 4 GeV/c.

The $\Delta\phi$ projections of the pure-cone correlations for |$\Delta\phi$| < $\pi$/4 for pion triggers.

The $\Delta\eta$ projections of the pure-cone correlations for |$\Delta\eta$| < 0.78 for pion triggers.

The $\Delta\phi$ projections of the pure-cone correlations for |$\Delta\phi$| < $\pi$/4 non-pion triggers.

The $\Delta\eta$ projections of the pure-cone correlations for |$\Delta\eta$| < 0.78 non-pion triggers.

$\Delta\phi$ projections over |$\Delta\eta$| < 1.5 in 0-10% Au+Au and minimum-bias d+Au data at 200 GeV after subtracting the jet-like fit components.

Extracted Fourier coefficients from fitting in $\pi$ 2 < $\Delta\phi$ < 3$\pi/2$ ) x (|$\Delta\eta$| < 1.5) (1.52 for d+Au), for pion, non-pion, and charged hadron triggers in the flow-based model.

Extracted Fourier coefficients from fitting in $\pi$ 2 < $\Delta\phi$ < 3$\pi/2$ ) x (|$\Delta\eta$| < 1.5) (1.52 for d+Au), for pion, non-pion, and charged hadron triggers in the flow-based model.

V3/V2 ratio for pion and non-pion triggers in Au+Au, and the extrapolated value for "pure protons".