$v_4$ from three particle cumulant as a function of $p_T$ for the minimum bias Au+Au collisions. Background from secondary particles is expected to be less than 15%. Non-flow systematic uncertainties are approximately 20%. Fluctuations in initial geometry can lead to an effect of about a factor of 1.2 to 1.5.

$v_6$ with respect to the second harmonic event plane as a function of $p_T$ for the minimum bias Au+Au collisions. Background from secondary particles is expected to be less than 15%. Non-flow systematic uncertainties are approximately 20%. Fluctuations in initial geometry can lead to an effect of about a factor of 1.2 to 1.5.

$p_T$- and $\eta$-integrated $v_2$, $v_4$, $v_6$ as a function of centrality. Background from secondary particles is expected to be less than 15%. Non-flow systematic uncertainties are approximately 20%. Fluctuations in initial geometry can lead to an effect of about a factor of 1.2 to 1.5.

The centrality dependence of the ratio of charged hadron spectra in backward rapidity to forward rapidity

The ratio of central (0-20%) to peripheral (40-100%) spectra in d+Au collisions for various pseudorapidity regions

Average transverse momentum per event for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV for the 5% most central collisions.

$<\Delta p_{t,i}\Delta p_{t,j}>$ as a function of centrality and incident energy for Au+Au collisions compared with HIJING results.

(d$N/\textrm{d}\eta)<\Delta p_{t,i}\Delta p_{t,j}>$ as a function of centrality and incident energy for Au+Au collisions compared with HIJING results.

$(<\Delta p_{t,i}\Delta p_{t,j}>)^{1/2}/<<p_{t}>>$ as a function of centrality and incident energy for Au+Au collisions compared with HIJING results.

$(<\Delta p_{t,i}\Delta p_{t,j}>)^{1/2}/<<p_{t}>>$ as a function of incident energy for 0-5% most central Au+Au collisions compared with CERES results.

The balance function versus $\Delta y$ for identified pion pairs from a) central and peripheral Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 130 GeV, and b) HIJING events simulated in GEANT [16]. To guide the eye, Gaussian fits excluding the lowest two bins in $\Delta y$ are shown. The error bars shown are statistical. The balance function for HIJING events is independent of centrality.

The balance function versus $\Delta y$ for identified pion pairs from a) central and peripheral Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 130 GeV, and b) HIJING events simulated in GEANT [16]. To guide the eye, Gaussian fits excluding the lowest two bins in $\Delta y$ are shown. The error bars shown are statistical. The balance function for HIJING events is independent of centrality.

The width of the balance function for identified charged pions, $⟨\Delta y⟩$, as a function of normalized impact parameter $(b/b_{max})$. Error bars shown are statistical. The width of the balance function from HIJING events is shown as a band whose height reflects the statistical uncertainty.

(a) The pair mass distribution, (b) pair $p){T}$ , (c) pair rapidity and (d) pair cos($\theta′$) distributions. The data (points) are compared with predictions from the EPA (solid histogram) and lowest-order QED (dashed histogram) calculations. The error bars include both statistical and systematic errors.

The $p_{T}$ spectra of the produced electrons and positrons, along with the comparable EPA and QED calculations. In both calculations, the electron and positron spectra are identical. Spectra from the two calculations are similar; the data agrees with both of them.

Upper plot: points are measured $p/E_{tower}$ electron peak position as a function of the distance to the center of the tower. The solid line is from a calculation based on a full GEANT simulation of the detector response to electrons. Lower plot: points show measured energy deposited by electrons in the tower as a function of the momentum for distances to the center of the tower smaller than 2.0 cm. The first point is the electron equivalent energy of the minimum ionizing particles. The solid line is a second order polynomial fit of the data.

Mean values from GEANT simulations of the energy deposited in the EMC by various hadronic species as a function of momentum.

Spatial profiles of energy deposition in the EMC as a function of distance ($d$) from the hit point to the center of the tower for $\pi^{+}$ and $\pi^{-}$ from simulations and for positive and negative hadrons from data. The arrow indicates the distance corresponding to the border of a tower in 0 < $\eta$ < 0.2. An overall agreement between the shapes of the profiles is observed, with a small normalization difference.

Event-by-event ratio of the reconstructed electromagnetic energy for the most central events. The solid line is a gaussian fit.

Total Transverse Energy for 0 < $\eta$ < 1. The minimum bias distribution is presented as well as the distributions for the different centrality bins (see table III). The shaded area corresponds to the 5% most central bin. The main axis scale corresponds to the $E_{T}$ measured in the detector acceptance and the bottom axis is corrected to represent the extrapolation to full azimuthal acceptance.

⟨$dE_{T}/d\eta|_{\eta=0.5}$⟩ per $N_{part}$ pair vs. $N_{part}$. Upper panel: $N_{part}$ is obtained from Monte Carlo Glauber calculations. The lines show calculations using the HIJING model [27](solid), the EKRT saturation model [7] (dotted, Eq. 8) and the two component fit (dashed, see text). Results from WA98 [14] and PHENIX [15] are also shown. The grey bands correspond to overall systematic uncertainties, independent of $N_{part}$. Error bars are the quadrature sum of the errors on the measurements and the uncertainties on $N_{part}$ calculation. Lower panel: the same data are shown as in the upper panel but using and Optical Glauber model calculation for $N_{part}$. The line shows the same result from EKRT model calculation.

⟨$dE_{T}/d\eta|_{\eta=0.5}$⟩ per $N_{part}$ pair vs. $N_{part}$. Upper panel: $N_{part}$ is obtained from Monte Carlo Glauber calculations. The lines show calculations using the HIJING model [27](solid), the EKRT saturation model [7] (dotted, Eq. 8) and the two component fit (dashed, see text). Results from WA98 [14] and PHENIX [15] are also shown. The grey bands correspond to overall systematic uncertainties, independent of $N_{part}$. Error bars are the quadrature sum of the errors on the measurements and the uncertainties on $N_{part}$ calculation. Lower panel: the same data are shown as in the upper panel but using and Optical Glauber model calculation for $N_{part}$. The line shows the same result from EKRT model calculation.

$dE_{T}/dy$ (see text for details) per $N_{part}$ pair vs $sqrt{s_{NN}}$ for central events. In this figure $dE_{T}/dy/(0.5N_{part})$ is seen to grow logarithmicaly with $sqrt{s_{NN}}$. The error bar in the STAR point represents the total systematic uncertainty. The solid line is a EKRT model prediction [7], corrected for $d\eta/dy$, for central Au+Au collisions.

Upper panel - ⟨$dE_{T}/d\eta⟩/⟨dN_{ch}/d\eta$⟩ vs $N_{part}$. Predictions from HIJING simulations for Au+Au at 200 GeV are presented. Results from WA98 [14] and PHENIX [15] are also shown. The grey band corresponds to an overall normalization uncertainty for the STAR measurement. Bottom panel - Charged hadrons mean transverse momentum as a function of $N_{part}$ [37].

Upper panel - ⟨$dE_{T}/d\eta⟩/⟨dN_{ch}/d\eta$⟩ vs $N_{part}$. Predictions from HIJING simulations for Au+Au at 200 GeV are presented. Results from WA98 [14] and PHENIX [15] are also shown. The grey band corresponds to an overall normalization uncertainty for the STAR measurement. Bottom panel - Charged hadrons mean transverse momentum as a function of $N_{part}$ [37].

⟨$dE_{T}/d\eta⟩/⟨dN_{ch}/d\eta$⟩ vs $sqrt{s_{NN}}$ for central events. The error bar in the STAR point corresponds to the systematic uncertaintiy. A constant value of ∼ 800 MeV per charged particle, within errors, characterizes transverse energy production over this full energy range.

Energy dependence of the electromagnetic fraction of the transverse energy for a number of systems spanning SPS to RHIC energy for central events.

Participant number dependence of the electromagnetic fraction of the total transverse energy. The results are consistent with HIJING within errors over the full centrality range.

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.

The ratios Anti-Λ/Λ, K+/K-, and Anti-Ξ+/Ξ- as a function of pT

Anti-baryon to baryon ratios measured by STAR

Ratios of $p_{T}$ distributions within 0.5 $<$ $|\eta|$ $<$ 1 to those within $|\eta|$$<$ 0.5 in various centrality bins. Errors are combined statistical and systematic.

dN/d$\eta$ distributions for $p_{T}$ $>$ 2 GeV/c and -1 $<$ $\eta$ $<$ 1 scaled by $N_{bin}$ and divided by the NN reference

Ratio of charged hadron yields within $|\eta|$ $<$ 1 for Au+Au relative to the NN reference, scaled by $N_{part}$/2 as a function of centrality for a $p_{T}$ bin at $p_{T}$ = 2.05 GeV/c

Participant scaling exponent v of charged hadron yields as a function of $p_{T}$ within $|\eta|$ $<$ 1

Ratio of truncated mean $p_{T}$ in $p_{T}$ $>$ $p_{T}^{cut}$ within $|\eta|$$<$1 as a function of $p_{T}^{cut}$ for central and peripheral collisions.

Binary scaling fraction in $p_{T}$ $>$ $p_{T}^{cut}$ within $|\eta|$ $<$ 1 as a function of centrality for selected $p_{T}^{cut}$. For $p_{T}^{cut}$ $>$ 2 GeV/c, the fraction F decreases with centrality.

The identified particle $R_{dAu}$ for minimum-bias and top 20 $\%$ d+Au collisions. Errors are statistical.

Minimum-bias ratios of protons (p+$\bar{p}$) over inclusive charged hadrons (h) at -0.5 $<$ $\eta$ 0.0 from $\sqrt{s} = 200 GeV$ p+p, d+Au and $\sqrt{s}$ = 130 GeV AuAu collisions. Errors are statistical.