$\pi^0$ spectra from figure 2a from 40-60% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ spectra from figure 2a from 60-80% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\eta$ spectra from figure 2b from minimum bias U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\eta$ spectra from figure 2b from 0-20% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\eta$ spectra from figure 2b from 20-40% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\eta$ spectra from figure 2b from 40-60% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\eta$ spectra from figure 2b from 60-80% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

Ratio of $\pi^0$ yield to the fit from figure 2c from minimum bias U+U collisions. Sys. uncertainties include B and C uncertainties from data points.

Ratio of $\pi^0$ yield to the fit from figure 2c from 0-20% U+U collisions. Sys. uncertainties include B and C uncertainties from data points.

Ratio of $\pi^0$ yield to the fit from figure 2c from 60-80% U+U collisions. Sys. uncertainties include B and C uncertainties from data points.

Ratio of $\eta$ yield to the fit from figure 2d from minimum bias U+U collisions. Sys. uncertainties include B and C uncertainties from data points.

Ratio of $\eta$ yield to the fit from figure 2d from 0-20% U+U collisions. Sys. uncertainties include B and C uncertainties from data points.

Ratio of $\eta$ yield to the fit from figure 2d from 40-60% U+U collisions. Sys. uncertainties include B and C uncertainties from data points.

$\eta/\pi^0$ ratio from figure 3 from minimum bias U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point.

$\eta/\pi^0$ ratio from figure 3 from 0-20% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point.

$\eta/\pi^0$ ratio from figure 3 from 20-40% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point.

$\eta/\pi^0$ ratio from figure 3 from 40-60% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point.

$\eta/\pi^0$ ratio from figure 3 from 60-80% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point.

$\eta/\pi^0$ ratio from figure 3 from minimum bias Au+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AA}$ from figure 4a from 0-20% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data. Calculation is carried out for Glauber 1 set.

$\eta$ $R_{AA}$ from figure 4a from 0-20% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data. Calculation is carried out for Glauber 1 set.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AA}$ from figure 4b from 20-40% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data. Calculation is carried out for Glauber 1 set.

$\eta$ $R_{AA}$ from figure 4b from 20-40% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data. Calculation is carried out for Glauber 1 set.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AA}$ from figure 4c from 40-60% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data. Calculation is carried out for Glauber 1 set.

$\eta$ $R_{AA}$ from figure 4c from 40-60% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data. Calculation is carried out for Glauber 1 set.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AA}$ from figure 4d from minimum bias U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data. Calculation is carried out for Glauber 1 set.

$\eta$ $R_{AA}$ from figure 4d from minimum bias U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data. Calculation is carried out for Glauber 1 set.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AA}$ from figure 5a from 0-20% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data. Calculation is carried out for Glauber 2 set.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AA}$ from figure 5a from 0-5% Au+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AA}$ from figure 5a from 40-60% U+U collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data. Calculation is carried out for Glauber 2 set.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AA}$ from figure 5a from 40-50% Au+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ integrated $R_{AA}$ for $p_T>5$ GeV/$c$ in U+U collisions as a function of centrality from figure 6a. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data. Calculation is carried out for Glauber 1 set.

$\eta$ integrated $R_{AA}$ for $p_T>5$ GeV/$c$ in U+U collisions as a function of centrality from figure 6a. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data. Calculation is carried out for Glauber 1 set.

$\pi^0$ integrated $R_{AA}$ for $p_T>5$ GeV/$c$ in Au+Au collisions as a function of centrality from figure 6a. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\eta$ integrated $R_{AA}$ for $p_T>5$ GeV/$c$ in U+U collisions as a function of centrality from figure 6b. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data. Calculation is carried out for Glauber 2 set.

Number of participant nucleons of in dep U$+$U collisions

Number of participant nucleons of in dep U$+$U collisions

Number of participant nucleons of in dep Au$+$Au collisions

$\pi^0$ spectra from figure 3a from 0-20% central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ spectra from figure 3a from 20-40% semi-central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ spectra from figure 3a from 40-60% semi-peripheral Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ spectra supplemental to figure 3a from 60-90% peripheral Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

Ratio of $\pi^0$ spectra from the PbSc to the combined spectra from figure 3b from 0-20% central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Systematic noncorr. uncertainties are uncorrelated between PbSc and PbGl subsystems.

Ratio of $\pi^0$ spectra from the PbGl to the combined spectra from figure 3b from 0-20% central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Systematic noncorr. uncertainties are uncorrelated between PbSc and PbGl subsystems.

Ratio of $\pi^0$ spectra from the PbSc to the combined spectra from figure 3c from 20-40% semi-central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Systematic noncorr. uncertainties are uncorrelated between PbSc and PbGl subsystems.

Ratio of $\pi^0$ spectra from the PbGl to the combined spectra from figure 3c from 20-40% semi-central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Systematic noncorr. uncertainties are uncorrelated between PbSc and PbGl subsystems.

Ratio of $\pi^0$ spectra from the PbSc to the combined spectra from figure 3d from 40-60% semi-peripheral Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Systematic noncorr. uncertainties are uncorrelated between PbSc and PbGl subsystems.

Ratio of $\pi^0$ spectra from the PbGl to the combined spectra from figure 3d from 40-60% semi-peripheral Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Systematic noncorr. uncertainties are uncorrelated between PbSc and PbGl subsystems.

$\eta$ spectra from figure 3e from minimum bias Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\eta$ spectra from figure 3e from 0-20% central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\eta$ spectra from figure 3e from 20-40% semi-central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\eta$ spectra from figure 3e from 40-60% semi-peripheral Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\eta$ spectra supplemental to figure 3e from 60-90% peripheral Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

Ratio of $\eta$ spectra from the PbSc to the combined spectra from figure 3f from 0-20% central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Systematic noncorr. uncertainties are uncorrelated between PbSc and PbGl subsystems.

Ratio of $\eta$ spectra from the PbGl to the combined spectra from figure 3f from 0-20% central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Systematic noncorr. uncertainties are uncorrelated between PbSc and PbGl subsystems.

Ratio of $\eta$ spectra from the PbSc to the combined spectra from figure 3g from 20-40% semi-central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Systematic noncorr. uncertainties are uncorrelated between PbSc and PbGl subsystems.

Ratio of $\eta$ spectra from the PbGl to the combined spectra from figure 3g from 20-40% semi-central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Systematic noncorr. uncertainties are uncorrelated between PbSc and PbGl subsystems.

Ratio of $\eta$ spectra from the PbSc to the combined spectra from figure 3h from 40-60% semi-peripheral Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Systematic noncorr. uncertainties are uncorrelated between PbSc and PbGl subsystems.

Ratio of $\eta$ spectra from the PbGl to the combined spectra from figure 3h from 40-60% semi-peripheral Au+Cu collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Systematic noncorr. uncertainties are uncorrelated between PbSc and PbGl subsystems.

$\eta/\pi^0$ ratio from figure 4 from minimum bias Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point.

$\eta/\pi^0$ ratio from figure 4 from 0-20% central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point.

$\eta/\pi^0$ ratio from figure 4 from 20-40% semi-central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point.

$\eta/\pi^0$ ratio from figure 4 from 40-60% semi-central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point.

$\eta/\pi^0$ ratio supplemental to figure 4 from 60-90% peripheral Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AB}$ from figure 5a from 0-10% central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AB}$ from figure 5b from 10-20% central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AB}$ from figure 5c from 0-20% central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\eta$ $R_{AB}$ from figure 5a from 0-20% central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AB}$ from figure 5d from 20-40% semi-central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\eta$ $R_{AB}$ from figure 5b from 20-40% semi-central Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AB}$ from figure 5e from 40-60% semi-peripheral Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\eta$ $R_{AB}$ from figure 5c from 40-60% semi-peripheral Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AB}$ from figure 5f from minimum bias Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\eta$ $R_{AB}$ from figure 5f from minimum bias Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AB}$ supplemental to figure 5 from 60-90% peripheral Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\eta$ $R_{AB}$ supplemental to figure 5 from 60-90% peripheral Cu+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AB}$ supplemental to figure 6a from 20-30% central Au+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AB}$ supplemental to figure 6b from 0-10% central Cu+Cu collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ $R_{AB}$ supplemental to figure 6b from 40-50% semi-central Au+Au collisions. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ for $p_T>5$ GeV/$c$ in Cu+Au collisions as a function of centrality from figure 7a. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ for $p_T>5$ GeV/$c$ in Au+Au collisions as a function of centrality from figure 7a. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ for $p_T>10$ GeV/$c$ in Cu+Au collisions as a function of centrality from figure 7b. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

$\pi^0$ for $p_T>10$ GeV/$c$ in Au+Au collisions as a function of centrality from figure 7b. Type A uncertainties are uncorrelated point-to-point. Type B uncertainties are correlated point-to-point. Type C uncertainties affect the scale of the data.

Multiplicity in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 130 GeV

Transverse energy in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV

Multiplicity in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV

Transverse energy in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV

Multiplicity in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV

Transverse energy in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV

Multiplicity in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV

Transverse energy in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV

Multiplicity in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV

Transverse energy in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV

Multiplicity in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV

Transverse energy in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV

Multiplicity in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV

Transverse energy in Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

Multiplicity in Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

Transverse energy in Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV

Multiplicity in Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV

Transverse energy in Cu+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

Multiplicity in Cu+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

Transverse energy in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV

Multiplicity in U+U collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 193 GeV

Transverse energy in d+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

Multiplicity in d+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

Transverse energy in He+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

Multiplicity in He+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

$\pi^0$ meson $v_4, 20-40\%$ centrality

$\pi^0$ meson $v_4, 40-60\%$ centrality

$\pi^0$ meson $v_4, 20-60\%$ centrality

$\pi^0$ meson $v_4/v_2^2, 0-20\%$ centrality

$\pi^0$ meson $v_4/v_2^2, 20-40\%$ centrality

$\pi^0$ meson $v_4/v_2^2, 40-60\%$ centrality

$\pi^0$ meson $v_4/v_2^2, 20-60\%$ centrality

$\Eta/ \pi^0 ratios

$\pi^0$ nuclear modification factors

$\pi^0$ nuclear modification factors

$pi^0$ nuclear modification factors vs reaction plane, $\Delta \phi = 0^{\circ}-15^{\circ}$

$pi^0$ nuclear modification factors vs reaction plane, $\Delta \phi = 0^{\circ}-15^{\circ}$

$pi^0$ nuclear modification factors vs reaction plane, $\Delta \phi = 15^{\circ}-30^{\circ}$

$pi^0$ nuclear modification factors vs reaction plane, $\Delta \phi = 15^{\circ}-30^{\circ}$

$pi^0$ nuclear modification factors vs reaction plane, $\Delta \phi = 30^{\circ}-45^{\circ}$

$pi^0$ nuclear modification factors vs reaction plane, $\Delta \phi = 30^{\circ}-45^{\circ}$

$pi^0$ nuclear modification factors vs reaction plane, $\Delta \phi = 45^{\circ}-60^{\circ}$

$pi^0$ nuclear modification factors vs reaction plane, $\Delta \phi = 45^{\circ}-60^{\circ}$

$pi^0$ nuclear modification factors vs reaction plane, $\Delta \phi = 60^{\circ}-75^{\circ}$

$pi^0$ nuclear modification factors vs reaction plane, $\Delta \phi = 60^{\circ}-75^{\circ}$

$pi^0$ nuclear modification factors vs reaction plane, $\Delta \phi = 75^{\circ}-90^{\circ}$

$pi^0$ nuclear modification factors vs reaction plane, $\Delta \phi = 75^{\circ}-90^{\circ}$

Centrality dependence of $p_T$ ingetrated $R_{AA}(\Delta \phi)$

Centrality dependence of $p_T$ ingetrated $R_{AA}(\Delta \phi)$

Rebinned $R_{AA}$ for $\Delta \phi$, $p_T$, and path length dependence,

The $K^{*0}$ mass (upper panel) and width (lower panel) as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias $p + p$ interactions and for central Au+Au collisions. The solid straight lines are the standard $K^{*0}$ mass (896.1 MeV/$c^2$ ) and width (50.7 MeV/$c^2$), respectively. The dashed and dotted curves are the MC results in minimum bias $p+p$ and for central Au+Au collisions, respectively, after considering detector effects and kinematic cuts. The grey shadows (caps) indicate the systematic uncertainties for the measurement in minimum bias $p + p$ interactions (central Au+Au collisions).

The $K^{*0}$ mass (upper panel) and width (lower panel) as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias $p + p$ interactions and for central Au+Au collisions. The solid straight lines are the standard $K^{*0}$ mass (896.1 MeV/$c^2$ ) and width (50.7 MeV/$c^2$), respectively. The dashed and dotted curves are the MC results in minimum bias $p+p$ and for central Au+Au collisions, respectively, after considering detector effects and kinematic cuts. The grey shadows (caps) indicate the systematic uncertainties for the measurement in minimum bias $p + p$ interactions (central Au+Au collisions).

The $K^{*0}$ mass (upper panel) and width (lower panel) as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias $p + p$ interactions and for central Au+Au collisions. The solid straight lines are the standard $K^{*0}$ mass (896.1 MeV/$c^2$ ) and width (50.7 MeV/$c^2$), respectively. The dashed and dotted curves are the MC results in minimum bias $p+p$ and for central Au+Au collisions, respectively, after considering detector effects and kinematic cuts. The grey shadows (caps) indicate the systematic uncertainties for the measurement in minimum bias $p + p$ interactions (central Au+Au collisions).

The $K^{*0}$ mass (upper panel) and width (lower panel) as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias $p + p$ interactions and for central Au+Au collisions. The solid straight lines are the standard $K^{*0}$ mass (896.1 MeV/$c^2$ ) and width (50.7 MeV/$c^2$), respectively. The dashed and dotted curves are the MC results in minimum bias $p+p$ and for central Au+Au collisions, respectively, after considering detector effects and kinematic cuts. The grey shadows (caps) indicate the systematic uncertainties for the measurement in minimum bias $p + p$ interactions (central Au+Au collisions).

The $K_S^0\pi^\pm$ invariant mass distribution integrated over the $K^{*\pm}$ $p_T$ for minimum bias $p + p$ collisions (upper panel) and for the $50-80\%$ of the inelastic hadronic Au+Au crosssection (lower panel) after the mixed-event background subtraction. The solid curves are fits to Eq. 10 and the dashed lines are the linear function representing the residual background.

The $K^{*0}$ and $K^{*\pm}$ reconstruction efficiency multiplied by the detector acceptance as a function of $p_T$ in minimum bias $p + p$ and different centralities in Au+Au collisions.

The $K^{*0}$ and $K^{*\pm}$ reconstruction efficiency multiplied by the detector acceptance as a function of $p_T$ in minimum bias $p + p$ and different centralities in Au+Au collisions.

The $K^{*0}$ and $K^{*\pm}$ reconstruction efficiency multiplied by the detector acceptance as a function of $p_T$ in minimum bias $p + p$ and different centralities in Au+Au collisions.

The $K^{*0}$ and $K^{*\pm}$ reconstruction efficiency multiplied by the detector acceptance as a function of $p_T$ in minimum bias $p + p$ and different centralities in Au+Au collisions.

The $(K^* + \bar{K^*})/2$ invariant yields as a function of $m_T − m_0$ for |y| < 0.5 from minimum bias $p + p$ and different centralities in Au+Au collisions. The top $10\% $central data have been multiplied by two for clarity. The lines are fits to Eq. 12. The errors shown are the quadratic sum of statistical and systematic (in the level of $10\% $) uncertainties.

The $(K^* + \bar{K^*})/2$ invariant yields as a function of $m_T − m_0$ for |y| < 0.5 from minimum bias $p + p$ and different centralities in Au+Au collisions. The top $10\% $central data have been multiplied by two for clarity. The lines are fits to Eq. 12. The errors shown are the quadratic sum of statistical and systematic (in the level of $10\% $) uncertainties.

The $(K^* + \bar{K^*})/2$ invariant yields as a function of $m_T − m_0$ for |y| < 0.5 from minimum bias $p + p$ and different centralities in Au+Au collisions. The top $10\% $central data have been multiplied by two for clarity. The lines are fits to Eq. 12. The errors shown are the quadratic sum of statistical and systematic (in the level of $10\% $) uncertainties.

(Color online) The invariant yields for both $(K^{*0} + \bar{K^{*0}})/2$ and $(K^{*+} + K^{*-})/2$ as a function of $p_T$ for |y| < 0.5 in minimum bias $p + p$ interactions. The dotted curve is the fit to the power-law function from Equation 13 for $p_T$ > 0.5 GeV/$c$ and extended to lower values of $p_T$ . The dashed curve is the $K^{*0}$ spectrum fit to the exponential function from Equation 12 and extended to higher values of $p_T$ . The dashed-dotted curve is the fit to the Levy function from Equation 14 for $p_T$ < 4 GeV/$c$. Errors are statistical only.

(Color online) The invariant yields for both $(K^{*0} + \bar{K^{*0}})/2$ and $(K^{*+} + K^{*-})/2$ as a function of $p_T$ for |y| < 0.5 in minimum bias $p + p$ interactions. The dotted curve is the fit to the power-law function from Equation 13 for $p_T$ > 0.5 GeV/$c$ and extended to lower values of $p_T$ . The dashed curve is the $K^{*0}$ spectrum fit to the exponential function from Equation 12 and extended to higher values of $p_T$ . The dashed-dotted curve is the fit to the Levy function from Equation 14 for $p_T$ < 4 GeV/$c$. Errors are statistical only.

(Color online) The $K^*$ $<p_T>$ as a function of $dN_{ch}/d\eta$ compared to that of $\pi^−$, $K^−$, and $p$ for minimum bias $p+p$ (solid symbols) and Au+Au (open symbols) collisions. The errors shown are the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties.

The $K^*/K$ (upper panel) and $\phi/K^*$ (lower panel) yield ratios as a function of the c.m. system energies. The yield ratios for central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=130 [35] and 200 GeV and minimum bias $p+p$ interactions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV are compared to measurements from e+e- at sqrt(s) of 10.45 GeV [48], 29 GeV [49] and 91 GeV [50,51], pbar-p at sqrt(s) of 5.6 GeV [52] and pp at sqrt(s) of 27.5 GeV [53], 52.5 GeV [54] and 63 GeV [55]. The errors at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=130 and 200 GeV correspond to the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic errors.

The $K^*/K$ (upper panel) and $\phi/K^*$ (lower panel) yield ratios as a function of the c.m. system energies. The yield ratios for central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=130 [35] and 200 GeV and minimum bias $p+p$ interactions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV are compared to measurements from e+e- at sqrt(s) of 10.45 GeV [48], 29 GeV [49] and 91 GeV [50,51], pbar-p at sqrt(s) of 5.6 GeV [52] and pp at sqrt(s) of 27.5 GeV [53], 52.5 GeV [54] and 63 GeV [55]. The errors at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=130 and 200 GeV correspond to the quadratic sum of the statistical and systematic errors.

The $K^{*0}$ v2 (filled stars) as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias Au+Au collisions compared to the $K^{0}_S$ (open triangles), $\Lambda$ (open circles), and charged hadron (open diamonds) $v_2$. The errors shown are statistical only.

The $K^*$ $R_{AA}$ (filled triangles) and $R_{CP}$ (filled circles) as a function of $p_T$ compared to the $K^{0}_S$ (open circles) and $\Lambda$ (open triangles) $R_{CP}$. The errors shown are statistical only. The dashed line represents the number of binary collisions scaling. The widths of the grey bands represent the systematic uncertainties of $R_{AA}$ (left) and $R_{CP}$ (right) due to the model calculations of $N_{bin}$.

The mid-rapidity kaon multiplicity densities ($dN/dy$) and mT exponential inverse slopes (T in MeV) as a function of negative hadron multiplicity with $|η|<0.5$ ($dNh-/dη$). Quoted errors are uncorrelated errors (first) and correlated systematic errors (second). Systematic error on $dNh-/dη$ is $7\%$.

The mid-rapidity kaon multiplicity densities ($dN/dy$) and mT exponential inverse slopes (T in MeV) as a function of negative hadron multiplicity with $|η|<0.5$ ($dNh-/dη$). Quoted errors are uncorrelated errors (first) and correlated systematic errors (second). Systematic error on $dNh-/dη$ is $7\%$.

Central 0-6% K/π yield ratios.

Antiproton fit parameters and yields. Systematic errors are 10%.