Distributions in $S_T$ in the SR for the electron channel, after a background-only fit to the data. The signal distributions are scaled to the cross section predicted by the theory. The hatched bands show the post-fit uncertainty band, combining all sources of uncertainty. The ratio of data to the background predictions is shown in the panels below the distributions.

Tuned intrinsic kT parameters ShowerHandler:IntrinsicPtGaussian in Herwig with the underlying-event tune CH2 at nucleon-nucleon center-of-mass energy from 38.8 GeV to 13 TeV.

Tuned intrinsic kT parameters ShowerHandler:IntrinsicPtGaussian in Herwig with the underlying-event tune CH3 at nucleon-nucleon center-of-mass energy from 38.8 GeV to 13 TeV.

Tuned intrinsic kT parameters BeamRemnants:PrimordialkThard in Pythia with the underlying-event tune CP5 and ISR starting scale SpaceShower:pT0Ref = 1 GeV at nucleon-nucleon center-of-mass energy from 38.8 GeV to 13 TeV.

Tuned intrinsic kT parameters ShowerHandler:IntrinsicPtGaussian in Herwig with the underlying-event tune CH3 and ISR starting scale SudakovCommon:pTmin=0.7 GeV at nucleon-nucleon center-of-mass energy from 38.8 GeV to 13 TeV.

Tuned intrinsic kT parameters BeamRemnants:PrimordialkThard in Pythia with the underlying-event tune CP5 at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 38.8 GeV versus the dilepton mass range of the process.

Tuned intrinsic kT parameters BeamRemnants:PrimordialkThard in Pythia with the underlying-event tune CP5 at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 8000 GeV versus the dilepton mass range of the process.

Tuned intrinsic kT parameters BeamRemnants:PrimordialkThard in Pythia with the underlying-event tune CP5 at proton-nucleon center-of-mass energy 8160 GeV versus the dilepton mass range of the process.

Tuned intrinsic kT parameters BeamRemnants:PrimordialkThard in Pythia with the underlying-event tune CP5 at proton-nucleon center-of-mass energy 13000 GeV versus the dilepton mass range of the process.

Tuned intrinsic kT parameters ShowerHandler:IntrinsicPtGaussian in Herwig with the underlying-event tune CH2 at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 38.8 GeV versus the dilepton mass range of the process.

Tuned intrinsic kT parameters ShowerHandler:IntrinsicPtGaussian in Herwig with the underlying-event tune CH2 at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 8000 GeV versus the dilepton mass range of the process.

Tuned intrinsic kT parameters ShowerHandler:IntrinsicPtGaussian in Herwig with the underlying-event tune CH2 at proton-nucleon center-of-mass energy 8160 GeV versus the dilepton mass range of the process.

Tuned intrinsic kT parameters ShowerHandler:IntrinsicPtGaussian in Herwig with the underlying-event tune CH2 at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 13000 GeV versus the dilepton mass range of the process.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters among various generator settings at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 38.8 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters among various generator settings at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 62 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters among various generator settings at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 200 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters among various generator settings at proton-anti-proton center-of-mass energy 1800 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters among various generator settings at proton-anti-proton center-of-mass energy 1960 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters among various generator settings at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 2760 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters among various generator settings at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 8000 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters among various generator settings at proton-nucleon center-of-mass energy 8160 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters among various generator settings at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 13000 GeV when fitting to the CMS measurement.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters among various generator settings at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 13000 GeV when fitting to the LHCb measurement.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Pythia at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 38.8 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Pythia at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 62 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Pythia at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 200 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Pythia at proton-anti-proton center-of-mass energy 1800 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Pythia at proton-anti-proton center-of-mass energy 1960 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Pythia at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 2760 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Pythia at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 8000 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Pythia at proton-nucleon center-of-mass energy 8160 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Pythia at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 13000 GeV when fitting to the CMS measurement.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Pythia at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 13000 GeV when fitting to the LHCb measurement.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Herwig at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 38.8 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Herwig at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 62 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Herwig at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 200 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Herwig at proton-anti-proton center-of-mass energy 1800 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Herwig at proton-anti-proton center-of-mass energy 1960 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Herwig at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 2760 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Herwig at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 8000 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Herwig at proton-nucleon center-of-mass energy 8160 GeV.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Herwig at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 13000 GeV when fitting to the CMS measurement.

Covariance of the data uncertainty contribution to the tuned intrinsic kT parameters between the two generator settings of Herwig at proton-proton center-of-mass energy 13000 GeV when fitting to the LHCb measurement.

The sumPT distribution in the Z+jets control region (electron channel). Expected background yields are given along with the total background uncertainty. The ttbar, W+jets and Z+jets backgrounds are normalised by the factors 0.95, 0.81 and 1.01 as obtained from the background likelihood fit. The single-top-quark and diboson background normalisations are taken from the simulation. The multijet background is obtained using a data-driven method. Additionally, the likelihood fit may constrain nuisance parameters for certain systematic uncertainties, altering the normalisation and shape of some of the distributions.

The sumPT distribution in the Z+jets control region (muon channel). Expected background yields are given along with the total background uncertainty. The ttbar, W+jets and Z+jets backgrounds are normalised by the factors 0.95, 0.81 and 1.01 as obtained from the background likelihood fit. The single-top-quark and diboson background normalisations are taken from the simulation. The multijet background is obtained using a data-driven method. Additionally, the likelihood fit may constrain nuisance parameters for certain systematic uncertainties, altering the normalisation and shape of some of the distributions.

The sumPT distribution in the ttbar control region (electron channel). Expected background yields are given along with the total background uncertainty. The ttbar, W+jets and Z+jets backgrounds are normalised by the factors 0.95, 0.81 and 1.01 as obtained from the background likelihood fit. The single-top-quark and diboson background normalisations are taken from the simulation. The multijet background is obtained using a data-driven method. Additionally, the likelihood fit may constrain nuisance parameters for certain systematic uncertainties, altering the normalisation and shape of some of the distributions.

The sumPT distribution in the ttbar control region (muon channel). Expected background yields are given along with the total background uncertainty. The ttbar, W+jets and Z+jets backgrounds are normalised by the factors 0.95, 0.81 and 1.01 as obtained from the background likelihood fit. The single-top-quark and diboson background normalisations are taken from the simulation. The multijet background is obtained using a data-driven method. Additionally, the likelihood fit may constrain nuisance parameters for certain systematic uncertainties, altering the normalisation and shape of some of the distributions.

The sumPT distribution in the electron channel. The selection is that of the signal regions except for the final requirement on sumPT. Expected background yields are given along with the total background uncertainty. The ttbar, W+jets and Z+jets backgrounds are normalised by the factors 0.95, 0.81 and 1.01 as obtained from the background likelihood fit. The single-top-quark and diboson background normalisations are taken from the simulation. The multijet background is obtained using a data-driven method. Additionally, the likelihood fit may constrain nuisance parameters for certain systematic uncertainties, altering the normalisation and shape of some of the distributions.

The sumPT distribution in the muon channel. The selection is that of the signal regions except for the final requirement on sumPT. Expected background yields are given along with the total background uncertainty. The ttbar, W+jets and Z+jets backgrounds are normalised by the factors 0.95, 0.81 and 1.01 as obtained from the background likelihood fit. The single-top-quark and diboson background normalisations are taken from the simulation. The multijet background is obtained using a data-driven method. Additionally, the likelihood fit may constrain nuisance parameters for certain systematic uncertainties, altering the normalisation and shape of some of the distributions.

Expected and observed exclusion contours in the MTH, MD plane for models of rotating black holes with two, four and six extra dimensions simulated with Charybdis2 1.0.4. Masses below the corresponding lines are excluded.

NLO cross sections and selection efficiencies (assuming $\beta$ = 1) for different signal points.

Fig. 2. (Color online.) Event-by-event photon multiplicity distributions (solid circles) for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ and $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4$ and $200 \mathrm{GeV} .$ The distributions for top $0-5 \%$ central $\mathrm{Au}+$ Au collisions and top $0-10 \%$ central $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu}$ collisions are also shown (open circles). The photon multiplicity distributions for central collisions are observed to be Gaussian (solid line). Only statistical errors are shown. NOTE: For points with invisible error bars, the point size was considered as an absolute upper limit for the uncertainty.

Fig. 2. (Color online.) Event-by-event photon multiplicity distributions (solid circles) for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ and $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4$ and $200 \mathrm{GeV} .$ The distributions for top $0-5 \%$ central $\mathrm{Au}+$ Au collisions and top $0-10 \%$ central $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu}$ collisions are also shown (open circles). The photon multiplicity distributions for central collisions are observed to be Gaussian (solid line). Only statistical errors are shown. NOTE: For points with invisible error bars, the point size was considered as an absolute upper limit for the uncertainty.

Fig. 2. (Color online.) Event-by-event photon multiplicity distributions (solid circles) for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ and $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4$ and $200 \mathrm{GeV} .$ The distributions for top $0-5 \%$ central $\mathrm{Au}+$ Au collisions and top $0-10 \%$ central $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu}$ collisions are also shown (open circles). The photon multiplicity distributions for central collisions are observed to be Gaussian (solid line). Only statistical errors are shown. NOTE: For points with invisible error bars, the point size was considered as an absolute upper limit for the uncertainty.

Fig. 3. (Color online.) Photon pseudorapidity distributions for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ and $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4$ and $200\mathrm{GeV}$. The results for several centrality classes are shown. The solid curves are results of HIJING simulations for central $(0-5 \%$ for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ and $0-10 \%$ for $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu})$ and $30-40 \%$ mid-central collisions. The errors shown are systematic, statistical errors are negligible in comparison. NOTE: For points with invisible error bars, the point size was considered as an absolute upper limit for the uncertainty.

Fig. 3. (Color online.) Photon pseudorapidity distributions for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ and $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4$ and $200\mathrm{GeV}$. The results for several centrality classes are shown. The solid curves are results of HIJING simulations for central $(0-5 \%$ for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ and $0-10 \%$ for $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu})$ and $30-40 \%$ mid-central collisions. The errors shown are systematic, statistical errors are negligible in comparison. NOTE: For points with invisible error bars, the point size was considered as an absolute upper limit for the uncertainty.

Fig. 3. (Color online.) Photon pseudorapidity distributions for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ and $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4$ and $200\mathrm{GeV}$. The results for several centrality classes are shown. The solid curves are results of HIJING simulations for central $(0-5 \%$ for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ and $0-10 \%$ for $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu})$ and $30-40 \%$ mid-central collisions. The errors shown are systematic, statistical errors are negligible in comparison. NOTE: For points with invisible error bars, the point size was considered as an absolute upper limit for the uncertainty.

Fig. 3. (Color online.) Photon pseudorapidity distributions for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ and $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{\mathrm{s}_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4$ and $200\mathrm{GeV}$. The results for several classes are shown. The solid curves are results of HIJING simulations for central $(0-5 \%$ for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ and $0-10 \%$ for $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu})$ and $30-40 \%$ mid-central collisions. The errors shown are systematic, statistical errors are negligible in comparison. NOTE: For points with invisible error bars, the point size was considered as an absolute upper limit for the uncertainty.

Fig. 4. (Color online.) Top panel: The number of photons divided by $\left\langle N_{\text{part}}\right\rangle / 2$ as a function of average number of participating nucleons for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ and $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{\mathrm{s} _{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4$ and $200 \mathrm{GeV}$ for $-3.7<\eta<-2.3 .$ Errors shown are systematic only and include those for $\left\langle N_{\text {part }}\right\rangle .$ Results from HIJING are shown as lines (solid for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ and dashed for $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu}$ ). Bottom panel: Same as above, for both photons and charged particles from PHOBOS [10]. NOTE: For points with invisible error bars, the point size was considered as an absolute upper limit for the uncertainty.

Fig. 4. (Color online.) Top panel: The number of photons divided by $\left\langle N_{\text{part}}\right\rangle / 2$ as a function of average number of participating nucleons for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ and $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu}$ at $\sqrt{\mathrm{s} _{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4$ and $200 \mathrm{GeV}$ for $-3.7<\eta<-2.3 .$ Errors shown are systematic only and include those for $\left\langle N_{\text {part }}\right\rangle .$ Results from HIJING are shown as lines (solid for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ and dashed for $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu}$ ). Bottom panel: Same as above, for both photons and charged particles from PHOBOS [10]. NOTE: For points with invisible error bars, the point size was considered as an absolute upper limit for the uncertainty.

Fig. 5. (Color online.) Photon pseudorapidity distributions normalized by the average number of participating nucleon pairs for different collision centralities are plotted as a function of pseudorapidity shifted by the beam rapidity (-5.36 for $200 \mathrm{GeV}$ and -4.19 for $62.4 \mathrm{GeV}$ ) for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ and $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4$ and $200 \mathrm{GeV}$. Errors are systematic only, statistical errors are negligible in comparison. For clarity of presentation, results for only four centralities are shown. The $\mathrm{Cu}+$ Cu data are shifted by 0.1 unit in $\eta-y_{\text {beam }} .$ The solid line is a second order polynomial fit to the data (see text for details).

Fig. 5. (Color online.) Photon pseudorapidity distributions normalized by the average number of participating nucleon pairs for different collision centralities are plotted as a function of pseudorapidity shifted by the beam rapidity (-5.36 for $200 \mathrm{GeV}$ and -4.19 for $62.4 \mathrm{GeV}$ ) for $\mathrm{Au}+\mathrm{Au}$ and $\mathrm{Cu}+\mathrm{Cu}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4$ and $200 \mathrm{GeV}$. Errors are systematic only, statistical errors are negligible in comparison. For clarity of presentation, results for only four centralities are shown. The $\mathrm{Cu}+$ Cu data are shifted by 0.1 unit in $\eta-y_{\text {beam }} .$ The solid line is a second order polynomial fit to the data (see text for details).

HBT parameters for all centralities in 62.4 GeV Cu+Cu.

HBT parameters for all centralities in 200 GeV Cu+Cu.

HBT parameters for 200 GeV Au+Au, 0-5% and Cu+Cu, 0-10%

HBT parameters for 200 GeV and 62.4 GeV Cu+Cu, 0-10% and 62.4 GeV Au+Au, 0-5%

HBT radii for radii ratios in 200 GeV and 62.4 GeV Cu+Cu, 0-10% and 200 GeV & 62.4 GeV Au+Au, 0-5%. Note that on Figure 8 in the paper the radii ratios are shown while here we list the radii values.

Energy dependence of the pi- HBT Radii for Volume estimate (Rside*Rside*Rlong) in central Au+Au, Pb+Pb, and Pb+Au collisions (AGS,SPS and RHIC) at midrapidity and k_T ~ 0.2-0.3 GeV/c. Note that on Figure 9 in the paper Rside*Rside*Rlong is shown while here we list the Rside and Rlong values.

HBT Radii for Volume estimate(Rside*Rside*Rlong & Rout*Rout*Rlong) comparisons for 200 GeV and 62.4 GeV Au+Au with Npart and dNch/deta. Note that on Figure 10 in the paper specific combinations of the HBT radii are shown while here we list the radii values.

HBT Radii for Volume estimate(Rside*Rside*Rlong & Rout*Rout*Rlong) comparisons for 200 GeV and 62.4 GeV Au+Au & Cu+Cu with dNch/deta. Note that on Figure 11 in the paper specific combinations of the HBT radii are shown while here we list the radii values.

HBT radii comparisons for 200 GeV and 62.4 GeV Au+Au & Cu+Cu with dNch/deta1/3

(Color online) Measured dynamical $K/\pi$ fluctuations in terms of $\nu_{dyn,K\pi}$ for 62.4 and 200 GeV Au+Au compared with $\sigma^{2}_{dyn}$ from central Pb+Pb collisions at 6.3, 7.6, 8.8, 12.3, and 17.3 GeV from NA49 [7]. Statistical errors are shown for the STAR data. Statistical and systematic errors are shown for the NA49 results. The solid line corresponds to a fit to the STAR data of the form $c + d/(dN/d\eta)$.

(Color online) The dN/dη scaled dynamical $K/\pi$ fluctuations for summed charges (stars), same signs (circles), and opposite signs (squares) as a function of $dN/d\eta$. The errors shown are statistical. The open and filled symbols refer to Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV and 200 GeV respectively. The dash-dot, dotted, and dashed lines represents HIJING calculations for summed charges, same signs, and opposite signs respectively.

Upper panels. $N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{part}}}$ scaled ($R^{N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{part}}}}_{AA}$) nuclear modification factors as a function of $p_{T}$ of $\phi$ mesons for $0-10\%$ and $20-30\%$ $Cu+Cu$ and $Au+Au$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=200$ GeV. Lower panel. Same as above for $N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{bin}}}$ scaled ($R^{N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{bin}}}}_{AA}$) nuclear modification factor. The error bars represent the statistical and systematic errors added in quadrature. The shaded band in upper panel around 1 at $p_{T}=4.5-5.5$ GeV/$c$ in the right side reflects the uncertainty in $N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{part}}}$ and that on the lower panel for $N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{bin}}}$ calculation for central $Au+Au$ collisions. The respective uncertainties for central $Cu+Cu$ collisions are of similar order.

Upper panels. $N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{part}}}$ scaled ($R^{N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{part}}}}_{AA}$) nuclear modification factors as a function of $p_{T}$ of $\phi$ mesons for $0-10\%$ and $20-30\%$ $Cu+Cu$ and $Au+Au$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=200$ GeV. Lower panel. Same as above for $N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{bin}}}$ scaled ($R^{N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{bin}}}}_{AA}$) nuclear modification factor. The error bars represent the statistical and systematic errors added in quadrature. The shaded band in upper panel around 1 at $p_{T}=4.5-5.5$ GeV/$c$ in the right side reflects the uncertainty in $N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{part}}}$ and that on the lower panel for $N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{bin}}}$ calculation for central $Au+Au$ collisions. The respective uncertainties for central $Cu+Cu$ collisions are of similar order.

Upper panels. $N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{part}}}$ scaled ($R^{N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{part}}}}_{AA}$) nuclear modification factors as a function of $p_{T}$ of $\phi$ mesons for $0-10\%$ and $20-30\%$ $Cu+Cu$ and $Au+Au$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=200$ GeV. Lower panel. Same as above for $N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{bin}}}$ scaled ($R^{N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{bin}}}}_{AA}$) nuclear modification factor. The error bars represent the statistical and systematic errors added in quadrature. The shaded band in upper panel around 1 at $p_{T}=4.5-5.5$ GeV/$c$ in the right side reflects the uncertainty in $N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{part}}}$ and that on the lower panel for $N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{bin}}}$ calculation for central $Au+Au$ collisions. The respective uncertainties for central $Cu+Cu$ collisions are of similar order.

Upper panel. The ratio of the yields of $K^{−}$, $\phi$, $\bar{\Lambda}$ and $\Xi+\bar{\Xi}$ normalized to $N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{part}}}$ in nucleus-nucleus collisions to corresponding yields in inelastic $p+p$ collisions as a function of $N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{part}}}$ at 200 GeV. Lower panel. Same as above for $\phi$ mesons in $Cu+Cu$ collisions at 200 and 62.4 GeV. The $p+p$ collision data at 200 GeV are from STAR [5] and at 62.4 GeV from ISR [29]. The error bars shown represent the statistical and systematic errors added in quadrature.

Upper panel. The ratio of the yields of $K^{−}$, $\phi$, $\bar{\Lambda}$ and $\Xi+\bar{\Xi}$ normalized to $N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{part}}}$ in nucleus-nucleus collisions to corresponding yields in inelastic $p+p$ collisions as a function of $N_{\scriptsize{\mbox{part}}}$ at 200 GeV. Lower panel. Same as above for $\phi$ mesons in $Cu+Cu$ collisions at 200 and 62.4 GeV. The $p+p$ collision data at 200 GeV are from STAR [5] and at 62.4 GeV from ISR [29]. The error bars shown represent the statistical and systematic errors added in quadrature.

Upper panels: same-event (full points) and mixed-event (solid line) $K^{+}K^{-}$ invariant mass distributions at 0.6 < $p_{T}$ < 1.4 GeV/c in p + p 200 GeV collisions (a), 0.8 < $p_{T}$ < 1.2 GeV/c in Au + Au 62.4 GeV collisions (60–80%) (c), and 0.8 < $p_{T}$ < 1.2 GeV/c in Au + Au 200 GeV collisions (0–10%) (e). Lower panels: the corresponding $\phi$ meson mass peaks after subtracting the background. Dashed curves show a Breit-Wigner + linear background function fit in (b), (d). In (f), both linear and quadratic backgrounds are shown as dashed and dot-dashed lines, respectively.

Upper panels: same-event (full points) and mixed-event (solid line) $K^{+}K^{-}$ invariant mass distributions at 0.6 < $p_{T}$ < 1.4 GeV/c in p + p 200 GeV collisions (a), 0.8 < $p_{T}$ < 1.2 GeV/c in Au + Au 62.4 GeV collisions (60–80%) (c), and 0.8 < $p_{T}$ < 1.2 GeV/c in Au + Au 200 GeV collisions (0–10%) (e). Lower panels: the corresponding $\phi$ meson mass peaks after subtracting the background. Dashed curves show a Breit-Wigner + linear background function fit in (b), (d). In (f), both linear and quadratic backgrounds are shown as dashed and dot-dashed lines, respectively.

Upper panels: same-event (full points) and mixed-event (solid line) $K^{+}K^{-}$ invariant mass distributions at 0.6 < $p_{T}$ < 1.4 GeV/c in p + p 200 GeV collisions (a), 0.8 < $p_{T}$ < 1.2 GeV/c in Au + Au 62.4 GeV collisions (60–80%) (c), and 0.8 < $p_{T}$ < 1.2 GeV/c in Au + Au 200 GeV collisions (0–10%) (e). Lower panels: the corresponding $\phi$ meson mass peaks after subtracting the background. Dashed curves show a Breit-Wigner + linear background function fit in (b), (d). In (f), both linear and quadratic backgrounds are shown as dashed and dot-dashed lines, respectively.

Reconstruction efficiency including acceptance of $\phi$ meson as a function of $p_{T}$ in several centrality bins of Au + Au, d + Au, and p + p 200 GeV collisions.

Reconstruction efficiency including acceptance of $\phi$ meson as a function of $p_{T}$ in several centrality bins of Au + Au, d + Au, and p + p 200 GeV collisions.

Reconstruction efficiency including acceptance of $\phi$ meson as a function of $p_{T}$ in several centrality bins of Au + Au, d + Au, and p + p 200 GeV collisions.

Event plane $\Phi_{2}$ resolution as a function of centrality in Au + Au 200 GeV collisions, where the vertical axis starts from 0.3 for clarity.

$\phi−\Phi_{2}$ distribution for $\phi$ meson at 1.5 < $p_{T}$ < 2.0 GeV/c in Au + Au collisions (0–80$\%$) at 200 GeV. The line is the fitting result. Error bars are statistical only.

<cos2($\phi_{K^{+}K^{-}}$-$\Phi_{2}$)> (full red points) and <sin2($\phi_{K^{+}K^{-}}$-$\Phi_{2}$)> (open blue points) as a function of $m_{inv}$ of $K^{+}K^{-}$ pairs at 0.5 < $p_{T}$ < 1.0 GeV/c in Au + Au 200 GeV collisions (0–80\%), where the solid curve is the result of fitting by Eq. (10). The arrow shows the position of the $\phi$ invariant mass peak. The dashed line shows the zero horizontal line.

Masses and widths (FWHMs) of $\phi$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in p + p 200 GeV (NSD), d + Au 200 GeV (0–20$\%$), Au + Au 62.4 GeV (0–20$\%$), and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions, with the corresponding $PDG$ values.

Masses and widths (FWHMs) of $\phi$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in p + p 200 GeV (NSD), d + Au 200 GeV (0–20$\%$), Au + Au 62.4 GeV (0–20$\%$), and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions, with the corresponding $PDG$ values.

Masses and widths (FWHMs) of $\phi$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in p + p 200 GeV (NSD), d + Au 200 GeV (0–20$\%$), Au + Au 62.4 GeV (0–20$\%$), and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions, with the corresponding $PDG$ values.

Masses and widths (FWHMs) of $\phi$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in p + p 200 GeV (NSD), d + Au 200 GeV (0–20$\%$), Au + Au 62.4 GeV (0–20$\%$), and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions, with the corresponding $PDG$ values.

Masses and widths (FWHMs) of $\phi$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in p + p 200 GeV (NSD), d + Au 200 GeV (0–20$\%$), Au + Au 62.4 GeV (0–20$\%$), and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions, with the corresponding $PDG$ values.

Masses and widths (FWHMs) of $\phi$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in p + p 200 GeV (NSD), d + Au 200 GeV (0–20$\%$), Au + Au 62.4 GeV (0–20$\%$), and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions, with the corresponding $PDG$ values.

Masses and widths (FWHMs) of $\phi$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in p + p 200 GeV (NSD), d + Au 200 GeV (0–20$\%$), Au + Au 62.4 GeV (0–20$\%$), and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions, with the corresponding $PDG$ values.

Masses and widths (FWHMs) of $\phi$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in p + p 200 GeV (NSD), d + Au 200 GeV (0–20$\%$), Au + Au 62.4 GeV (0–20$\%$), and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions, with the corresponding $PDG$ values.

Masses and widths (FWHMs) of $\phi$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in p + p 200 GeV (NSD), d + Au 200 GeV (0–20$\%$), Au + Au 62.4 GeV (0–20$\%$), and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions, with the corresponding $PDG$ values.

Masses and widths (FWHMs) of $\phi$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in p + p 200 GeV (NSD), d + Au 200 GeV (0–20$\%$), Au + Au 62.4 GeV (0–20$\%$), and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions, with the corresponding $PDG$ values.

Masses and widths (FWHMs) of $\phi$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in p + p 200 GeV (NSD), d + Au 200 GeV (0–20$\%$), Au + Au 62.4 GeV (0–20$\%$), and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions, with the corresponding $PDG$ values.

Masses and widths (FWHMs) of $\phi$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in p + p 200 GeV (NSD), d + Au 200 GeV (0–20$\%$), Au + Au 62.4 GeV (0–20$\%$), and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions, with the corresponding $PDG$ values.

Masses and widths (FWHMs) of $\phi$ as a function of $p_{T}$ in p + p 200 GeV (NSD), d + Au 200 GeV (0–20$\%$), Au + Au 62.4 GeV (0–20$\%$), and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions, with the corresponding $PDG$ values.

Invariant mass distributions of $\phi$ meson at 0.6 < $p_{T}$ < 1.0 GeV/c in p + p 200 GeV (NSD) and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions. Solid symbols: experimental data. Open symbols: MC simulation. Curves are the results of a Breit-Wigner function fit. Note: Two sets of MC data are shown for Au + Au 200 GeV, and see text for details.

Invariant mass distributions of $\phi$ meson at 0.6 < $p_{T}$ < 1.0 GeV/c in p + p 200 GeV (NSD) and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions. Solid symbols: experimental data. Open symbols: MC simulation. Curves are the results of a Breit-Wigner function fit. Note: Two sets of MC data are shown for Au + Au 200 GeV, and see text for details.

Invariant mass distributions of $\phi$ meson at 0.6 < $p_{T}$ < 1.0 GeV/c in p + p 200 GeV (NSD) and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions. Solid symbols: experimental data. Open symbols: MC simulation. Curves are the results of a Breit-Wigner function fit. Note: Two sets of MC data are shown for Au + Au 200 GeV, and see text for details.

Invariant mass distributions of $\phi$ meson at 0.6 < $p_{T}$ < 1.0 GeV/c in p + p 200 GeV (NSD) and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions. Solid symbols: experimental data. Open symbols: MC simulation. Curves are the results of a Breit-Wigner function fit. Note: Two sets of MC data are shown for Au + Au 200 GeV, and see text for details.

Invariant mass distributions of $\phi$ meson at 0.6 < $p_{T}$ < 1.0 GeV/c in p + p 200 GeV (NSD) and Au + Au 200 GeV (0–5$\%$) collisions. Solid symbols: experimental data. Open symbols: MC simulation. Curves are the results of a Breit-Wigner function fit. Note: Two sets of MC data are shown for Au + Au 200 GeV, and see text for details.

$\phi$ meson transverse mass distributions for different collision systems and different energies. For clarity, distributions for some centrality bins have been scaled by factors indicated in the figure. Curves represent the exponential (solid) and Levy (dashed) function fits to the distributions. Error bars are statistical only. Note that a scale factor of 1.09 is applied to the $\phi$ meson spectra for Au + Au collisions at 200 GeV in Ref. [50] to correct for the kaon identification efficiency effect missed previously.

$\phi$ meson transverse mass distributions for different collision systems and different energies. For clarity, distributions for some centrality bins have been scaled by factors indicated in the figure. Curves represent the exponential (solid) and Levy (dashed) function fits to the distributions. Error bars are statistical only. Note that a scale factor of 1.09 is applied to the $\phi$ meson spectra for Au + Au collisions at 200 GeV in Ref. [50] to correct for the kaon identification efficiency effect missed previously.

$\phi$ meson transverse mass distributions for different collision systems and different energies. For clarity, distributions for some centrality bins have been scaled by factors indicated in the figure. Curves represent the exponential (solid) and Levy (dashed) function fits to the distributions. Error bars are statistical only. Note that a scale factor of 1.09 is applied to the $\phi$ meson spectra for Au + Au collisions at 200 GeV in Ref. [50] to correct for the kaon identification efficiency effect missed previously.

$\phi$ meson transverse mass distributions for different collision systems and different energies. For clarity, distributions for some centrality bins have been scaled by factors indicated in the figure. Curves represent the exponential (solid) and Levy (dashed) function fits to the distributions. Error bars are statistical only. Note that a scale factor of 1.09 is applied to the $\phi$ meson spectra for Au + Au collisions at 200 GeV in Ref. [50] to correct for the kaon identification efficiency effect missed previously.

$\phi$ meson transverse mass distributions for different collision systems and different energies. For clarity, distributions for some centrality bins have been scaled by factors indicated in the figure. Curves represent the exponential (solid) and Levy (dashed) function fits to the distributions. Error bars are statistical only. Note that a scale factor of 1.09 is applied to the $\phi$ meson spectra for Au + Au collisions at 200 GeV in Ref. [50] to correct for the kaon identification efficiency effect missed previously.

$\phi$ meson transverse mass distributions for different collision systems and different energies. For clarity, distributions for some centrality bins have been scaled by factors indicated in the figure. Curves represent the exponential (solid) and Levy (dashed) function fits to the distributions. Error bars are statistical only. Note that a scale factor of 1.09 is applied to the $\phi$ meson spectra for Au + Au collisions at 200 GeV in Ref. [50] to correct for the kaon identification efficiency effect missed previously.

$\phi$ meson transverse mass distributions for different collision systems and different energies. For clarity, distributions for some centrality bins have been scaled by factors indicated in the figure. Curves represent the exponential (solid) and Levy (dashed) function fits to the distributions. Error bars are statistical only. Note that a scale factor of 1.09 is applied to the $\phi$ meson spectra for Au + Au collisions at 200 GeV in Ref. [50] to correct for the kaon identification efficiency effect missed previously.

Comparison of transverse momentum spectra shape among different 200 GeV collision systems: Au + Au (0–5$\%$), d + Au (0–20$\%$), and p + p (inelastic). The spectra are normalized by $N_{bin}$ (top panel) and $N_{part}/2$ (bottom panel).

Comparison of transverse momentum spectra shape among different 200 GeV collision systems: Au + Au (0–5$\%$), d + Au (0–20$\%$), and p + p (inelastic). The spectra are normalized by $N_{bin}$ (top panel) and $N_{part}/2$ (bottom panel).

Comparison of transverse momentum spectra shape among different 200 GeV collision systems: Au + Au (0–5$\%$), d + Au (0–20$\%$), and p + p (inelastic). The spectra are normalized by $N_{bin}$ (top panel) and $N_{part}/2$ (bottom panel).

Comparison of transverse momentum spectra shape among different 200 GeV collision systems: Au + Au (0–5$\%$), d + Au (0–20$\%$), and p + p (inelastic). The spectra are normalized by $N_{bin}$ (top panel) and $N_{part}/2$ (bottom panel).

Comparison of transverse momentum spectra shape among different 200 GeV collision systems: Au + Au (0–5$\%$), d + Au (0–20$\%$), and p + p (inelastic). The spectra are normalized by $N_{bin}$ (top panel) and $N_{part}/2$ (bottom panel).

Comparison of transverse momentum spectra shape among different 200 GeV collision systems: Au + Au (0–5$\%$), d + Au (0–20$\%$), and p + p (inelastic). The spectra are normalized by $N_{bin}$ (top panel) and $N_{part}/2$ (bottom panel).

$N_{part}$ dependence of $(dN/dy)/0.5N_{part}$ in five different collision systems: Au + Au 62.4, 130, 200 GeV; p + p 200 GeV (inelastic); and d + Au 200 GeV. Statistical and systematic errors are included.

$N_{part}$ dependence of $(dN/dy)/0.5N_{part}$ in five different collision systems: Au + Au 62.4, 130, 200 GeV; p + p 200 GeV (inelastic); and d + Au 200 GeV. Statistical and systematic errors are included.

$N_{part}$ dependence of $(dN/dy)/0.5N_{part}$ in five different collision systems: Au + Au 62.4, 130, 200 GeV; p + p 200 GeV (inelastic); and d + Au 200 GeV. Statistical and systematic errors are included.

$N_{part}$ dependence of $(dN/dy)/0.5N_{part}$ in five different collision systems: Au + Au 62.4, 130, 200 GeV; p + p 200 GeV (inelastic); and d + Au 200 GeV. Statistical and systematic errors are included.

$N_{part}$ dependence of $(dN/dy)/0.5N_{part}$ in five different collision systems: Au + Au 62.4, 130, 200 GeV; p + p 200 GeV (inelastic); and d + Au 200 GeV. Statistical and systematic errors are included.

Top panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of $<p_{T}>_{\phi}$ in different collision systems. Bottom panel: Hadron mass dependence of $<p_{T}>$ in central Au + Au collisions at 62.4 and 200 GeV. The band and curve show two hydrodynamic model calculations for central Au + Au collisions at 200 GeV. Note: Hadron masses for the Au + Au 62.4 GeV data are shifted slightly in the $x$-axis direction for clarity, and systematic errors are included for $\phi$.

Top panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of $<p_{T}>_{\phi}$ in different collision systems. Bottom panel: Hadron mass dependence of $<p_{T}>$ in central Au + Au collisions at 62.4 and 200 GeV. The band and curve show two hydrodynamic model calculations for central Au + Au collisions at 200 GeV. Note: Hadron masses for the Au + Au 62.4 GeV data are shifted slightly in the $x$-axis direction for clarity, and systematic errors are included for $\phi$.

Top panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of $<p_{T}>_{\phi}$ in different collision systems. Bottom panel: Hadron mass dependence of $<p_{T}>$ in central Au + Au collisions at 62.4 and 200 GeV. The band and curve show two hydrodynamic model calculations for central Au + Au collisions at 200 GeV. Note: Hadron masses for the Au + Au 62.4 GeV data are shifted slightly in the $x$-axis direction for clarity, and systematic errors are included for $\phi$.

Top panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of $<p_{T}>_{\phi}$ in different collision systems. Bottom panel: Hadron mass dependence of $<p_{T}>$ in central Au + Au collisions at 62.4 and 200 GeV. The band and curve show two hydrodynamic model calculations for central Au + Au collisions at 200 GeV. Note: Hadron masses for the Au + Au 62.4 GeV data are shifted slightly in the $x$-axis direction for clarity, and systematic errors are included for $\phi$.

Top panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of $<p_{T}>_{\phi}$ in different collision systems. Bottom panel: Hadron mass dependence of $<p_{T}>$ in central Au + Au collisions at 62.4 and 200 GeV. The band and curve show two hydrodynamic model calculations for central Au + Au collisions at 200 GeV. Note: Hadron masses for the Au + Au 62.4 GeV data are shifted slightly in the $x$-axis direction for clarity, and systematic errors are included for $\phi$.

Top panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of $<p_{T}>_{\phi}$ in different collision systems. Bottom panel: Hadron mass dependence of $<p_{T}>$ in central Au + Au collisions at 62.4 and 200 GeV. The band and curve show two hydrodynamic model calculations for central Au + Au collisions at 200 GeV. Note: Hadron masses for the Au + Au 62.4 GeV data are shifted slightly in the $x$-axis direction for clarity, and systematic errors are included for $\phi$.

Top panel: Energy dependence of the ratio $\phi/\pi^{-}$ in A + A (full points) and p + p (open points) collisions. Stars are data from the STARexperiment at RHIC.Bottom panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of ratio $\phi/\pi^{-}$ in different collision systems. Systematic errors are included for the STAR data points.

Top panel: Energy dependence of the ratio $\phi/\pi^{-}$ in A + A (full points) and p + p (open points) collisions. Stars are data from the STARexperiment at RHIC.Bottom panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of ratio $\phi/\pi^{-}$ in different collision systems. Systematic errors are included for the STAR data points.

Top panel: Energy dependence of the ratio $\phi/\pi^{-}$ in A + A (full points) and p + p (open points) collisions. Stars are data from the STARexperiment at RHIC.Bottom panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of ratio $\phi/\pi^{-}$ in different collision systems. Systematic errors are included for the STAR data points.

Top panel: Energy dependence of the ratio $\phi/\pi^{-}$ in A + A (full points) and p + p (open points) collisions. Stars are data from the STARexperiment at RHIC.Bottom panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of ratio $\phi/\pi^{-}$ in different collision systems. Systematic errors are included for the STAR data points.

Top panel: Energy dependence of the ratio $\phi/\pi^{-}$ in A + A (full points) and p + p (open points) collisions. Stars are data from the STARexperiment at RHIC.Bottom panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of ratio $\phi/\pi^{-}$ in different collision systems. Systematic errors are included for the STAR data points.

Top panel: Energy dependence of the ratio $\phi/\pi^{-}$ in A + A (full points) and p + p (open points) collisions. Stars are data from the STARexperiment at RHIC.Bottom panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of ratio $\phi/\pi^{-}$ in different collision systems. Systematic errors are included for the STAR data points.

Top panel: Energy dependence of the ratio $\phi/\pi^{-}$ in A + A (full points) and p + p (open points) collisions. Stars are data from the STARexperiment at RHIC.Bottom panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of ratio $\phi/\pi^{-}$ in different collision systems. Systematic errors are included for the STAR data points.

Top panel: Energy dependence of ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ in $A + A$ and elementary ($e + e$ and $p + p$) collisions. Stars are data from STAR experiments at RHIC. Bottom panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ in different collision systems. The dashed line shows results from $UrQMD$ model calculations. Systematic errors are included for the STAR data points.

Top panel: Energy dependence of ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ in $A + A$ and elementary ($e + e$ and $p + p$) collisions. Stars are data from STAR experiments at RHIC. Bottom panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ in different collision systems. The dashed line shows results from $UrQMD$ model calculations. Systematic errors are included for the STAR data points.

Top panel: Energy dependence of ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ in $A + A$ and elementary ($e + e$ and $p + p$) collisions. Stars are data from STAR experiments at RHIC. Bottom panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ in different collision systems. The dashed line shows results from $UrQMD$ model calculations. Systematic errors are included for the STAR data points.

Top panel: Energy dependence of ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ in $A + A$ and elementary ($e + e$ and $p + p$) collisions. Stars are data from STAR experiments at RHIC. Bottom panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ in different collision systems. The dashed line shows results from $UrQMD$ model calculations. Systematic errors are included for the STAR data points.

Top panel: Energy dependence of ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ in $A + A$ and elementary ($e + e$ and $p + p$) collisions. Stars are data from STAR experiments at RHIC. Bottom panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ in different collision systems. The dashed line shows results from $UrQMD$ model calculations. Systematic errors are included for the STAR data points.

Top panel: Energy dependence of ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ in $A + A$ and elementary ($e + e$ and $p + p$) collisions. Stars are data from STAR experiments at RHIC. Bottom panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ in different collision systems. The dashed line shows results from $UrQMD$ model calculations. Systematic errors are included for the STAR data points.

Top panel: Energy dependence of ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ in $A + A$ and elementary ($e + e$ and $p + p$) collisions. Stars are data from STAR experiments at RHIC. Bottom panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ in different collision systems. The dashed line shows results from $UrQMD$ model calculations. Systematic errors are included for the STAR data points.

Top panel: Energy dependence of ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ in $A + A$ and elementary ($e + e$ and $p + p$) collisions. Stars are data from STAR experiments at RHIC. Bottom panel: $N_{part}$ dependence of ratio $\phi/K^{-}$ in different collision systems. The dashed line shows results from $UrQMD$ model calculations. Systematic errors are included for the STAR data points.

The $\Omega/\phi$ ratio vs $p_{T}$ for three centrality bins in $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 200 GeV$ Au + Au collisions, where the data points for 40–60$\%$ are shifted slightly for clarity. As shown in the legend, the lines represent results from Hwa and Yang [96], Ko et al. [97], and, for SCF, Refs. [98,99].

The $\Omega/\phi$ ratio vs $p_{T}$ for three centrality bins in $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 200 GeV$ Au + Au collisions, where the data points for 40–60$\%$ are shifted slightly for clarity. As shown in the legend, the lines represent results from Hwa and Yang [96], Ko et al. [97], and, for SCF, Refs. [98,99].

$p_{T}$ dependence of the nuclear modification factor $R_{cp}$ in Au + Au 200 GeV collisions. The top and bottom panels present $R_{cp}$ from midperipheral and most-peripheral collisions, respectively. See legend for symbol and line designations. The rectangular bands showthe uncertainties of binary and participant scalings. Statistical and systematic errors are included.

$p_{T}$ dependence of the nuclear modification factor $R_{cp}$ in Au + Au 200 GeV collisions. The top and bottom panels present $R_{cp}$ from midperipheral and most-peripheral collisions, respectively. See legend for symbol and line designations. The rectangular bands showthe uncertainties of binary and participant scalings. Statistical and systematic errors are included.

$p_{T}$ dependence of the nuclear modification factor $R_{cp}$ in Au + Au 62.4 and 200 GeV and d + Au 200 GeV collisions, where rectangular bands represent the uncertainties of binary and participant scalings (see legend). Statistical and systematic errors are included.

$p_{T}$ dependence of the nuclear modification factor $R_{cp}$ in Au + Au 62.4 and 200 GeV and d + Au 200 GeV collisions, where rectangular bands represent the uncertainties of binary and participant scalings (see legend). Statistical and systematic errors are included.

$p_{T}$ dependence of the nuclear modification factor $R_{cp}$ in Au + Au 62.4 and 200 GeV and d + Au 200 GeV collisions, where rectangular bands represent the uncertainties of binary and participant scalings (see legend). Statistical and systematic errors are included.

$p_{T}$ dependence of the nuclear modification factor $R_{AB}$ for $\phi$ in Au + Au 200 GeV and d + Au 200 GeV collisions. For comparison, data points for $\pi^{+}+\pi^{-}$ in d + Au 200 GeV and $p+\bar{p}$ in d + Au 200 GeV are also shown (see legend). Rectangular bands show the uncertainties of binary (solid line) and participant (dot-dash line) scalings. Systematic errors are included for $\phi$, $\pi^{+}+\pi^{-}$, and $p+\bar{p}$.

$p_{T}$ dependence of the nuclear modification factor $R_{AB}$ for $\phi$ in Au + Au 200 GeV and d + Au 200 GeV collisions. For comparison, data points for $\pi^{+}+\pi^{-}$ in d + Au 200 GeV and $p+\bar{p}$ in d + Au 200 GeV are also shown (see legend). Rectangular bands show the uncertainties of binary (solid line) and participant (dot-dash line) scalings. Systematic errors are included for $\phi$, $\pi^{+}+\pi^{-}$, and $p+\bar{p}$.

$p_{T}$ dependence of the elliptic flow $v_{2}$ of $\phi$, $\Lambda$, and $K_{s}^{0}$ in Au + Au collisions (0–80$\%$) at 200 GeV. Data points for $\phi$ are from the reaction plane method (full up-triangles) and invariant mass method (full circles), where data points from the reaction plane method are shifted slightly along the $x$ axis for clarity. Vertical error bars represent statistical errors, while the square bands represent systematic uncertainties. The magenta curved band represents the $v_{2}$ of $\phi$ meson from the AMPT model with a string melting mechanism [116]. The dash and dot curves represent parametrizations inspired by number-of-quark scaling ideas from Ref. [117] for NQ = 2 and NQ = 3, respectively.

Elliptic flow $v_{2}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ , $v_{2}$($p_{T}$), for the $\phi$ meson from different centralities. The vertical error bars represent the statistical errors, while the square bands represent the systematic uncertainties. For clarity, data points of 10–40$\%$ are shifted in the $p_{T}$ direction slightly.

Elliptic flow $v_{2}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ , $v_{2}$($p_{T}$), for the $\phi$ meson from different centralities. The vertical error bars represent the statistical errors, while the square bands represent the systematic uncertainties. For clarity, data points of 10–40$\%$ are shifted in the $p_{T}$ direction slightly.