Showing 25 of 222 results
Elliptic flow measurements from two-, four- and six-particle correlations are used to investigate flow fluctuations in collisions of U+U at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$= 193 GeV, Cu+Au at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$= 200 GeV and Au+Au spanning the range $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$= 11.5 - 200 GeV. The measurements show a strong dependence of the flow fluctuations on collision centrality, a modest dependence on system size, and very little if any, dependence on particle species and beam energy. The results, when compared to similar LHC measurements, viscous hydrodynamic calculations, and T$\mathrel{\protect\raisebox{-2.1pt}{R}}$ENTo model eccentricities, indicate that initial-state-driven fluctuations predominate the flow fluctuations generated in the collisions studied.
The Au+Au 200 GeV measurements of the two and four-particle elliptic flow and the elliptic flow fluctuations of the $\pi$ particle.
The Au+Au 200 GeV measurements of the two and four-particle elliptic flow and the elliptic flow fluctuations of the K particle.
The Au+Au 200 GeV measurements of the two and four-particle elliptic flow and the elliptic flow fluctuations of the p particle.
The Au+Au 200 GeV measurements of the two-, four- and six-particle elliptic flow and the elliptic flow fluctuations.
The Au+Au 54.4 GeV measurements of the two-, four- and six-particle elliptic flow and the elliptic flow fluctuations.
The Au+Au 39 GeV measurements of the two-, four- and six-particle elliptic flow and the elliptic flow fluctuations.
The Au+Au 27 GeV measurements of the two-, four- and six-particle elliptic flow and the elliptic flow fluctuations.
The Au+Au 19.6 GeV measurements of the two- and four-particle elliptic flow and the elliptic flow fluctuations.
The Au+Au 11.5 GeV measurements of the two- and four-particle elliptic flow and the elliptic flow fluctuations.
The U+U 193 GeV measurements of the two-, four- and six-particle elliptic flow and the elliptic flow fluctuations.
The Cu+Au 200 GeV measurements of the two-, four- and six-particle elliptic flow and the elliptic flow fluctuations.
The deconfined quark-gluon plasma (QGP) created in relativistic heavy-ion collisions enables the exploration of the fundamental properties of matter under extreme conditions. Non-central collisions can produce strong magnetic fields on the order of $10^{18}$ Gauss, which offers a probe into the electrical conductivity of the QGP. In particular, quarks and anti-quarks carry opposite charges and receive contrary electromagnetic forces that alter their momenta. This phenomenon can be manifested in the collective motion of final-state particles, specifically in the rapidity-odd directed flow, denoted as $v_1(\mathsf{y})$. Here we present the charge-dependent measurements of $dv_1/d\mathsf{y}$ near midrapidities for $\pi^{\pm}$, $K^{\pm}$, and $p(\bar{p})$ in Au+Au and isobar ($_{44}^{96}$Ru+$_{44}^{96}$Ru and $_{40}^{96}$Zr+$_{40}^{96}$Zr) collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=$ 200 GeV, and in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV, recorded by the STAR detector at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider. The combined dependence of the $v_1$ signal on collision system, particle species, and collision centrality can be qualitatively and semi-quantitatively understood as several effects on constituent quarks. While the results in central events can be explained by the $u$ and $d$ quarks transported from initial-state nuclei, those in peripheral events reveal the impacts of the electromagnetic field on the QGP. Our data put valuable constraints on the electrical conductivity of the QGP in theoretical calculations.
Density fluctuations near the QCD critical point can be probed via an intermittency analysis in relativistic heavy-ion collisions. We report the first measurement of intermittency in Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7-200 GeV measured by the STAR experiment at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC). The scaled factorial moments of identified charged hadrons are analyzed at mid-rapidity and within the transverse momentum phase space. We observe a power-law behavior of scaled factorial moments in Au$+$Au collisions and a decrease in the extracted scaling exponent ($\nu$) from peripheral to central collisions. The $\nu$ is consistent with a constant for different collisions energies in the mid-central (10-40%) collisions. Moreover, the $\nu$ in the 0-5% most central Au$+$Au collisions exhibits a non-monotonic energy dependence that reaches a possible minimum around $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 27 GeV. The physics implications on the QCD phase structure are discussed.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 19.6 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 39 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 200 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 19.6 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 39 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 200 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 11.5 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 19.6 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 27 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 39 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 54.4 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 62.4 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 200 GeV.
The scaling index, $\beta_{q}$ ($q=$ 3-6), as a function of $q-1$ in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7-200 GeV.
The scaling exponent ($\nu$), as a function of average number of participant nucleons ($\langle N_{part}\rangle$), in Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 19.6-200 GeV. The data with the largest number of $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ correspond to the most central collisions (0-5\%), and the rest of the points are for 5-10\%, 10-20\%, 20-30\% and 30-40\% centrality, respectively. The numbers of $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 19.6 are: 338,289,225,158,108. The numbers of $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 27 GeV are: 343,299,234,166,114. The numbers of $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 39 GeV are: 342,294,230,162,111. The numbers of $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 54.4 GeV are: 346,292,228,161,111. The numbers of $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 62.4 GeV are 347,294,230,164,114. The numbers of $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 200 GeV are:351,299,234,168,117.
Collision energy dependence of the scaling exponent in the 0-10% and 10-40% centrality collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7-200 GeV
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 11.5 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 19.6 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 27 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 39 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 54.4 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 62.4 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 200 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 11.5 GeV
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 14.5 GeV
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 19.6 GeV
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 27 GeV
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 39 GeV
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 54.4 GeV
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 62.4 GeV
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 200 GeV
Efficiency corrected and uncorrected $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central (0-5%) Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 27 GeV
Efficiency corrected and uncorrected $\Delta F_{3}(M)$ as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central (0-5%) Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 27 GeV
Efficiency corrected and uncorrected $\Delta F_{4}(M)$ as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central (0-5%) Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 27 GeV
Efficiency corrected and uncorrected $\Delta F_{5}(M)$ as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central (0-5%) Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 27 GeV
Efficiency corrected and uncorrected $\Delta F_{6}(M)$ as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central (0-5%) Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 27 GeV
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the 5-10\% centrality Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the 10-20\% centrality Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the 20-30\% centrality Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the 30-40\% centrality Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in 0-5% centrality classes at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in 5-10% centrality classes at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in 10-20% centrality classes at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in 20-30% centrality classes at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in 30-40% centrality classes at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV
Global polarizations ($P$) of $\Lambda$ ($\bar{\Lambda}$) hyperons have been observed in non-central heavy-ion collisions. The strong magnetic field primarily created by the spectator protons in such collisions would split the $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ global polarizations ($\Delta P = P_{\Lambda} - P_{\bar{\Lambda}} < 0$). Additionally, quantum chromodynamics (QCD) predicts topological charge fluctuations in vacuum, resulting in a chirality imbalance or parity violation in a local domain. This would give rise to an imbalance ($\Delta n = \frac{N_{\text{L}} - N_{\text{R}}}{\langle N_{\text{L}} + N_{\text{R}} \rangle} \neq 0$) between left- and right-handed $\Lambda$ ($\bar{\Lambda}$) as well as a charge separation along the magnetic field, referred to as the chiral magnetic effect (CME). This charge separation can be characterized by the parity-even azimuthal correlator ($\Delta\gamma$) and parity-odd azimuthal harmonic observable ($\Delta a_{1}$). Measurements of $\Delta P$, $\Delta\gamma$, and $\Delta a_{1}$ have not led to definitive conclusions concerning the CME or the magnetic field, and $\Delta n$ has not been measured previously. Correlations among these observables may reveal new insights. This paper reports measurements of correlation between $\Delta n$ and $\Delta a_{1}$, which is sensitive to chirality fluctuations, and correlation between $\Delta P$ and $\Delta\gamma$ sensitive to magnetic field in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. For both measurements, no correlations have been observed beyond statistical fluctuations.
Figure 1
Figure 2ab
Figure 2c
Figure 4a
Figure 4b
Figure 4c
Figure 5a
Figure 5b
Figure 5c
Figure 7
Figure 8a
Figure 8b
Figure 8c
Figure 9a
Figure 9b
Figure 9c
Figure 10a
Figure 10b
Figure 10c
In relativistic heavy-ion collisions, a global spin polarization, $P_\mathrm{H}$, of $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ hyperons along the direction of the system angular momentum was discovered and measured across a broad range of collision energies and demonstrated a trend of increasing $P_\mathrm{H}$ with decreasing $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$. A splitting between $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ polarization may be possible due to their different magnetic moments in a late-stage magnetic field sustained by the quark-gluon plasma which is formed in the collision. The results presented in this study find no significant splitting at the collision energies of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=19.6$ and $27$ GeV in the RHIC Beam Energy Scan Phase II using the STAR detector, with an upper limit of $P_{\bar{\Lambda}}-P_{\Lambda}<0.24$% and $P_{\bar{\Lambda}}-P_{\Lambda}<0.35$%, respectively, at a 95% confidence level. We derive an upper limit on the na\"ive extraction of the late-stage magnetic field of $B<9.4\cdot10^{12}$ T and $B<1.4\cdot10^{13}$ T at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=19.6$ and $27$ GeV, respectively, although more thorough derivations are needed. Differential measurements of $P_\mathrm{H}$ were performed with respect to collision centrality, transverse momentum, and rapidity. With our current acceptance of $|y|<1$ and uncertainties, we observe no dependence on transverse momentum and rapidity in this analysis. These results challenge multiple existing model calculations following a variety of different assumptions which have each predicted a strong dependence on rapidity in this collision-energy range.
The first-order event-plane resolution determined by the STAR EPD as a function of collision centrality is roughly doubled in comparison to previous analyses using the STAR BBC. We see $R_{\rm EP}^{(1)}$ peak for mid-central collisions.
The mid-central $P_{\rm H}$ measurements reported in this work are shown alongside previous measurements in the upper panel, and are consistent with previous measurements at the energies studied here. The difference between integrated $P_{\bar{\Lambda}}$ and $P_{\Lambda}$ is shown at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}}$=19.6 and 27 GeV alongside previous measurements in the lower panel. The splittings observed with these high-statistics data sets are consistent with zero. Statistical uncertainties are represented as lines while systematic uncertainties are represented as boxes. The previous $P_{\bar{\Lambda}}-P_{\Lambda}$ result at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=7.7$ GeV is outside the axis range, but is consistent with zero within $2\sigma$.
$P_{\rm H}$ measurements are shown as a function of collision centrality at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=19.6 and 27 GeV. Statistical uncertainties are represented as lines while systematic uncertainties are represented as boxes. $P_{\rm H}$ increases with collision centrality at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=19.6 and 27 GeV, as expected from an angular-momentum-driven phenomenon.
$P_{\rm H}$ measurements are shown as a function of hyperon $p_{\rm T}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=19.6 and 27 GeV. Statistical uncertainties are represented as lines while systematic uncertainties are represented as boxes. There is no observed dependence of $P_{\rm H}$ on $p_{\rm T}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=19.6 or 27 GeV, consistent with previous observations.
$P_{\rm H}$ measurements are shown as a function of hyperon $y$ at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=19.6 and 27 GeV. Statistical uncertainties are represented as lines while systematic uncertainties are represented as boxes. The data set at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$=19.6 GeV takes advantage of STAR upgrades to reach larger $|y|$.
We report the triton ($t$) production in mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 0.5) Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$= 7.7--200 GeV measured by the STAR experiment from the first phase of the beam energy scan at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC). The nuclear compound yield ratio ($\mathrm{N}_t \times \mathrm{N}_p/\mathrm{N}_d^2$), which is predicted to be sensitive to the fluctuation of local neutron density, is observed to decrease monotonically with increasing charged-particle multiplicity ($dN_{ch}/d\eta$) and follows a scaling behavior. The $dN_{ch}/d\eta$ dependence of the yield ratio is compared to calculations from coalescence and thermal models. Enhancements in the yield ratios relative to the coalescence baseline are observed in the 0%-10% most central collisions at 19.6 and 27 GeV, with a significance of 2.3$\sigma$ and 3.4$\sigma$, respectively, giving a combined significance of 4.1$\sigma$. The enhancements are not observed in peripheral collisions or model calculations without critical fluctuation, and decreases with a smaller $p_{T}$ acceptance. The physics implications of these results on the QCD phase structure and the production mechanism of light nuclei in heavy-ion collisions are discussed.
We present results on strange and multi-strange particle production in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=62.4$ GeV as measured with the STAR detector at RHIC. Mid-rapidity transverse momentum spectra and integrated yields of $K^{0}_{S}$, $\Lambda$, $\Xi$, $\Omega$ and their anti-particles are presented for different centrality classes. The particle yields and ratios follow a smooth energy dependence. Chemical freeze-out parameters, temperature, baryon chemical potential and strangeness saturation factor obtained from the particle yields are presented. Intermediate transverse momentum ($p_T$) phenomena are discussed based on the ratio of the measured baryon-to-meson spectra and nuclear modification factor. The centrality dependence of various measurements presented show a similar behavior as seen in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=200$ GeV.
Correction factors (acceptance × efficiency) for the most central events ( 0−5% for KS0, Λ and Ξ; 0−20% for Ω) at mid-rapidity (|y| < 1) as a function of pT for the different particle species as obtained via embedding. The branching ratio of the measured decay channel is not factored into this plot.
Correction factors (acceptance × efficiency) for the most central events ( 0−5% for KS0, Λ and Ξ; 0−20% for Ω) at mid-rapidity (|y| < 1) as a function of pT for the different particle species as obtained via embedding. The branching ratio of the measured decay channel is not factored into this plot.
Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.
Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.
Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.
Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.
Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.
Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.
Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.
Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.
Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.
Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.
Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.
Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.
Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.
Efficiency corrected pT spectra for the different centrality bins and for the various particles. Note that 7 centrality bins have been used for the KS0 and the Λ while only 6 and 3 have been used for the Ξ and Ω, respectively. Errors are statistical only. The Λ spectra are corrected for the feed-down of the Ξ decay.
Extrapolated average transverse momenta ⟨pT ⟩ as a function of dNch/dy for different particle species in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. Statistical uncertainties are represented by the error bars at the points while the systematic uncertainties are represented by the gray bars. The π, charged K and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].
Extrapolated average transverse momenta ⟨pT ⟩ as a function of dNch/dy for different particle species in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. Statistical uncertainties are represented by the error bars at the points while the systematic uncertainties are represented by the gray bars. The π, charged K and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].
KS0 dN/dpT spectra compared to the charged Kaon spectra for the event centrality of 0-5% and 30-40%. The charged Kaons data points are for rapidity range of |y| < 0.1 and were extracted from Ref. [14].
KS0 dN/dpT spectra compared to the charged Kaon spectra for the event centrality of 0-5% and 30-40%. The charged Kaons data points are for rapidity range of |y| < 0.1 and were extracted from Ref. [14].
KS0 dN/dpT spectra compared to the charged Kaon spectra for the event centrality of 0-5% and 30-40%. The charged Kaons data points are for rapidity range of |y| < 0.1 and were extracted from Ref. [14].
KS0 dN/dpT spectra compared to the charged Kaon spectra for the event centrality of 0-5% and 30-40%. The charged Kaons data points are for rapidity range of |y| < 0.1 and were extracted from Ref. [14].
Strange particle production yields at mid-rapidity in central Au+Au and Pb+Pb collisions versus the center of mass energy √sNN. The top panel shows results for K0S and Λ. The AGS values are from E896 [1] (centrality 0 − 5 %). The SPS values are from NA49 [20] (centrality 0 − 7 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [4, 15] (centrality 0 − 5 %). For the multi-strange baryons Ξ and Ω (bottom panel), the SPS results are from NA57 [2] (centrality 0 − 11 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [15, 21] (centrality 0 − 20 %).
Strange particle production yields at mid-rapidity in central Au+Au and Pb+Pb collisions versus the center of mass energy √sNN. The top panel shows results for K0S and Λ. The AGS values are from E896 [1] (centrality 0 − 5 %). The SPS values are from NA49 [20] (centrality 0 − 7 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [4, 15] (centrality 0 − 5 %). For the multi-strange baryons Ξ and Ω (bottom panel), the SPS results are from NA57 [2] (centrality 0 − 11 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [15, 21] (centrality 0 − 20 %).
Strange particle production yields at mid-rapidity in central Au+Au and Pb+Pb collisions versus the center of mass energy √sNN. The top panel shows results for K0S and Λ. The AGS values are from E896 [1] (centrality 0 − 5 %). The SPS values are from NA49 [20] (centrality 0 − 7 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [4, 15] (centrality 0 − 5 %). For the multi-strange baryons Ξ and Ω (bottom panel), the SPS results are from NA57 [2] (centrality 0 − 11 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [15, 21] (centrality 0 − 20 %).
Strange particle production yields at mid-rapidity in central Au+Au and Pb+Pb collisions versus the center of mass energy √sNN. The top panel shows results for K0S and Λ. The AGS values are from E896 [1] (centrality 0 − 5 %). The SPS values are from NA49 [20] (centrality 0 − 7 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [4, 15] (centrality 0 − 5 %). For the multi-strange baryons Ξ and Ω (bottom panel), the SPS results are from NA57 [2] (centrality 0 − 11 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [15, 21] (centrality 0 − 20 %).
Anti-baryon to baryon yield ratios for strange baryons versus the center of mass energy √sNN. Λ/Λ is shown in the top panel while the multi-strange baryons are on the bottom panel. The data from AGS are not corrected for the weak decay feed-down from the multistrange baryons while the data from SPS and RHIC are corrected. The lines are the results of a thermal model calculation (see text section IV A). The AGS values are from E896 [1] (centrality 0 − 5 %). The SPS values are from NA49 [20] (centrality 0 − 7 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [4, 15] (centrality 0 − 5 %). For the multi- strange baryons Ξ and Ω (bottom panel), the SPS results are from NA57 [2] (centrality 0 − 11 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [15, 21] (centrality 0 − 20 %).
Anti-baryon to baryon yield ratios for strange baryons versus the center of mass energy √sNN. Λ/Λ is shown in the top panel while the multi-strange baryons are on the bottom panel. The data from AGS are not corrected for the weak decay feed-down from the multistrange baryons while the data from SPS and RHIC are corrected. The lines are the results of a thermal model calculation (see text section IV A). The AGS values are from E896 [1] (centrality 0 − 5 %). The SPS values are from NA49 [20] (centrality 0 − 7 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [4, 15] (centrality 0 − 5 %). For the multi- strange baryons Ξ and Ω (bottom panel), the SPS results are from NA57 [2] (centrality 0 − 11 %) and the RHIC values are from STAR [15, 21] (centrality 0 − 20 %).
Antibaryon-to-baryon yield ratios for strange particles and protons as a function of dNch/dy at √sNN=62.4 and 200 GeV. The p data were extracted from Ref. [14]. The √sNN=200 GeV strange hadron data were extracted from Ref. [15].
Antibaryon-to-baryon yield ratios for strange particles and protons as a function of dNch/dy at √sNN=62.4 and 200 GeV. The p data were extracted from Ref. [14]. The √sNN=200 GeV strange hadron data were extracted from Ref. [15].
Particle-yield ratios as obtained by measurements (black dots) for the most central (0–5%) Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV and statistical model predictions (lines). The ratios indicated by the dashed lines (blue) were obtained by using only π, K, and protons, whereas the ratios indicated by the full lines (green) were obtained by also using the hyperons in the fit.
Particle-yield ratios as obtained by measurements (black dots) for the most central (0–5%) Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV and statistical model predictions (lines). The ratios indicated by the dashed lines (blue) were obtained by using only π, K, and protons, whereas the ratios indicated by the full lines (green) were obtained by also using the hyperons in the fit.
Chemical freeze-out temperature Tch (a) and strangeness saturation factor γs (b) as a function of the mean number of participants.
Chemical freeze-out temperature Tch (a) and strangeness saturation factor γs (b) as a function of the mean number of participants.
Chemical freeze-out temperature Tch (a) and strangeness saturation factor γs (b) as a function of the mean number of participants.
Chemical freeze-out temperature Tch (a) and strangeness saturation factor γs (b) as a function of the mean number of participants.
Temperature and baryon chemical potential obtained from thermal model fits as a function of √sNN (see Ref. [22]). The dashed lines correspond to the parametrizations given in Ref. [22]. The solid stars show the result for √sNN=62.4 and 200 GeV.
Temperature and baryon chemical potential obtained from thermal model fits as a function of √sNN (see Ref. [22]). The dashed lines correspond to the parametrizations given in Ref. [22]. The solid stars show the result for √sNN=62.4 and 200 GeV.
Temperature and baryon chemical potential obtained from thermal model fits as a function of √sNN (see Ref. [22]). The dashed lines correspond to the parametrizations given in Ref. [22]. The solid stars show the result for √sNN=62.4 and 200 GeV.
Temperature and baryon chemical potential obtained from thermal model fits as a function of √sNN (see Ref. [22]). The dashed lines correspond to the parametrizations given in Ref. [22]. The solid stars show the result for √sNN=62.4 and 200 GeV.
Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π+ as a function of dNch/dy for √sNN=62.4 GeV (left) and √sNN=200 GeV (right). The π and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].
Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π- as a function of dNch/dy for √sNN=62.4 GeV (left) and √sNN=200 GeV (right). The π and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].
Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π+ as a function of dNch/dy for √sNN=62.4 GeV (left) and √sNN=200 GeV (right). The π and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].
Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π- as a function of dNch/dy for √sNN=62.4 GeV (left) and √sNN=200 GeV (right). The π and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].
Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π+ as a function of dNch/dy for √sNN=62.4 GeV (left) and √sNN=200 GeV (right). The π and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].
Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π- as a function of dNch/dy for √sNN=62.4 GeV (left) and √sNN=200 GeV (right). The π and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].
Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π+ as a function of dNch/dy for √sNN=62.4 GeV (left) and √sNN=200 GeV (right). The π and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].
Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π- as a function of dNch/dy for √sNN=62.4 GeV (left) and √sNN=200 GeV (right). The π and p data were extracted from Ref. [14].
Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π− as a function of √sNN. The lines are the results of the thermal model calculation (see text Sec. 4a). The SPS values are from NA49 [20] (centrality 0–7%) and the RHIC values are from STAR [4, 15] (centrality 0–5%). For the multistrange baryons Ξ and Ω (bottom), the SPS results are from NA57 [2] (centrality 0–11%) and the RHIC values are from STAR [15, 21] (centrality 0–20%).
Ratio of baryon (solid symbols) and antibaryon (open symbols) to π− as a function of √sNN. The lines are the results of the thermal model calculation (see text Sec. 4a). The SPS values are from NA49 [20] (centrality 0–7%) and the RHIC values are from STAR [4, 15] (centrality 0–5%). For the multistrange baryons Ξ and Ω (bottom), the SPS results are from NA57 [2] (centrality 0–11%) and the RHIC values are from STAR [15, 21] (centrality 0–20%).
Nuclear modification factor RCP, calculated as the ratio between 0–10% central spectra and 40–80% peripheral spectra, for π, K0S, Λ, and Ξ particles in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The π RCP values were extracted from Ref. [10]. The gray band on the right side of the plot shows the uncertainties on the estimation of the number of binary collisions and the gray band on the lower left side indicates the uncertainties on the number of participants.
Nuclear modification factor RCP, calculated as the ratio between 0–10% central spectra and 40–80% peripheral spectra, for π, K0S, Λ, and Ξ particles in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The π RCP values were extracted from Ref. [10]. The gray band on the right side of the plot shows the uncertainties on the estimation of the number of binary collisions and the gray band on the lower left side indicates the uncertainties on the number of participants.
Nuclear modification factor RCP, calculated as the ratio between 0–5% central spectra and 40–60% peripheral spectra, for Λ and Ξ particles measured in Au + Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The gray band corresponds to the equivalent RCP curve for the Λ particles measured in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV [15].
Nuclear modification factor RCP, calculated as the ratio between 0–5% central spectra and 40–60% peripheral spectra, for Λ and Ξ particles measured in Au + Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The gray band corresponds to the equivalent RCP curve for the Λ particles measured in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV [15].
Λ/K0S ratio as a function of transverse momentum for different centrality classes. 0–5% (solid circles), 40–60% (open squares), and 60–80% (solid triangles) in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV.
Λ/K0S ratio as a function of transverse momentum for different centrality classes. 0–5% (solid circles), 40–60% (open squares), and 60–80% (solid triangles) in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV.
Maximum value of the Λ/K0S ratio from Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV (solid circles) and 200 GeV (open circles) [11] as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ for different centrality classes. The lowest ⟨Npart⟩ point corresponds to p+p collisions at 200 GeV [44]. The maximum of the Λ––/K0S from Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV is shown as solid triangles.
Maximum value of the Λ/K0S ratio from Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV (solid circles) and 200 GeV (open circles) [11] as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ for different centrality classes. The lowest ⟨Npart⟩ point corresponds to p+p collisions at 200 GeV [44]. The maximum of the Λ––/K0S from Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV is shown as solid triangles.
The linear and mode-coupled contributions to higher-order anisotropic flow are presented for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$ = 27, 39, 54.4, and 200 GeV and compared to similar measurements for Pb+Pb collisions at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). The coefficients and the flow harmonics' correlations, which characterize the linear and mode-coupled response to the lower-order anisotropies, indicate a beam energy dependence consistent with an influence from the specific shear viscosity ($\eta/s$). In contrast, the dimensionless coefficients, mode-coupled response coefficients, and normalized symmetric cumulants are approximately beam-energy independent, consistent with a significant role from initial-state effects. These measurements could provide unique supplemental constraints to (i) distinguish between different initial-state models and (ii) delineate the temperature ($T$) and baryon chemical potential ($\mu_{B}$) dependence of the specific shear viscosity $\frac{\eta}{s} (T, \mu_B)$.
Comparison of the integrated three-particle correlators for Au+Au collisions at 54.4 GeV.
Comparison of the integrated three-particle correlators for Au+Au collisions at 39.0 GeV.
Comparison of the integrated three-particle correlators for Au+Au collisions at 27.0 GeV.
Comparison of the inclusive, mode-coupled and linear higher-order flow harmonics $v_4$ for Au+Au collisions at 54.4 GeV.
Comparison of the inclusive, mode-coupled and linear higher-order flow harmonics $v_5$ for Au+Au collisions at 54.4 GeV.
Comparison of the inclusive, mode-coupled and linear higher-order flow harmonics $v_4$ for Au+Au collisions at 39.0 GeV.
Comparison of the inclusive, mode-coupled and linear higher-order flow harmonics $v_4$ for Au+Au collisions at 27.0 GeV.
Comparison of the $\chi_{4,22}$ and $\rho_{4,22}$ for Au+Au collisions at 54.4 GeV.
Comparison of the $\chi_{3,23}$ and $\rho_{5,23}$ for Au+Au collisions at 54.4 GeV.
Comparison of the $\chi_{4,22}$ and $\rho_{4,22}$ for Au+Au collisions at 39.0 GeV.
Comparison of the $\chi_{4,22}$ and $\rho_{4,22}$ for Au+Au collisions at 27.0 GeV.
Comparison of the $NSC(2,3)$ and $NSC(2,4)$ for Au+Au collisions at 54.4 GeV.
Comparison of the $NSC(2,3)$ and $NSC(2,4)$ for Au+Au collisions at 27.0 GeV.
We report the measurement of $K^{*0}$ meson at midrapidity ($|y|<$ 1.0) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$~=~7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27 and 39 GeV collected by the STAR experiment during the RHIC beam energy scan (BES) program. The transverse momentum spectra, yield, and average transverse momentum of $K^{*0}$ are presented as functions of collision centrality and beam energy. The $K^{*0}/K$ yield ratios are presented for different collision centrality intervals and beam energies. The $K^{*0}/K$ ratio in heavy-ion collisions are observed to be smaller than that in small system collisions (e+e and p+p). The $K^{*0}/K$ ratio follows a similar centrality dependence to that observed in previous RHIC and LHC measurements. The data favor the scenario of the dominance of hadronic re-scattering over regeneration for $K^{*0}$ production in the hadronic phase of the medium.
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV (Multiplicity class 0-20%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV (Multiplicity class 20-40%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV (Multiplicity class 40-60%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV (Multiplicity class 60-80%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 0-10%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 10-20%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 20-30%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 30-40%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 40-60%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 60-80%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 0-10%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 10-20%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 20-30%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 30-40%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 40-60%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 60-80%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV (Multiplicity class 0-10%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV (Multiplicity class 10-20%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV (Multiplicity class 20-30%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV (Multiplicity class 30-40%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV (Multiplicity class 40-60%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV (Multiplicity class 60-80%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV (Multiplicity class 0-10%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV (Multiplicity class 10-20%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV (Multiplicity class 20-30%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV (Multiplicity class 30-40%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV (Multiplicity class 40-60%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV (Multiplicity class 60-80%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV (Multiplicity class 0-10%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV (Multiplicity class 10-20%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV (Multiplicity class 20-30%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV (Multiplicity class 30-40%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV (Multiplicity class 40-60%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV (Multiplicity class 60-80%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$- integrated yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$p_{\mathrm T}$- integrated yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$p_{\mathrm T}$- integrated yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$p_{\mathrm T}$- integrated yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$p_{\mathrm T}$- integrated yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$p_{\mathrm T}$- integrated yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
<$p_{\mathrm T}$> of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
<$p_{\mathrm T}$> of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
<$p_{\mathrm T}$> of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
<$p_{\mathrm T}$> of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
<$p_{\mathrm T}$> of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
<$p_{\mathrm T}$> of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. $<(dN_{ch}/dy)^{1/3}>$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. $<(dN_{ch}/dy)^{1/3}>$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~11.5 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. $<(dN_{ch}/dy)^{1/3}>$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. $<(dN_{ch}/dy)^{1/3}>$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. $<(dN_{ch}/dy)^{1/3}>$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. $<(dN_{ch}/dy)^{1/3}>$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{2\phi}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV
$\frac{2\phi}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV
$\frac{2\phi}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV
$\frac{2\phi}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV
$\frac{2\phi}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV
lower limit of hadronic phase lifetime vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV
lower limit of hadronic phase lifetime vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV
lower limit of hadronic phase lifetime vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV
lower limit of hadronic phase lifetime vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV
lower limit of hadronic phase lifetime vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV
lower limit of hadronic phase lifetime vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV
lower limit of hadronic phase lifetime vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$62.4 GeV
lower limit of hadronic phase lifetime vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$200 GeV
Azimuthal anisotropy of produced particles is one of the most important observables used to access the collective properties of the expanding medium created in relativistic heavy-ion collisions. In this paper, we present second ($v_{2}$) and third ($v_{3}$) order azimuthal anisotropies of $K_{S}^{0}$, $\phi$, $\Lambda$, $\Xi$ and $\Omega$ at mid-rapidity ($|y|<$1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\text{NN}}}$ = 54.4 GeV measured by the STAR detector. The $v_{2}$ and $v_{3}$ are measured as a function of transverse momentum and centrality. Their energy dependence is also studied. $v_{3}$ is found to be more sensitive to the change in the center-of-mass energy than $v_{2}$. Scaling by constituent quark number is found to hold for $v_{2}$ within 10%. This observation could be evidence for the development of partonic collectivity in 54.4 GeV Au+Au collisions. Differences in $v_{2}$ and $v_{3}$ between baryons and anti-baryons are presented, and ratios of $v_{3}$/$v_{2}^{3/2}$ are studied and motivated by hydrodynamical calculations. The ratio of $v_{2}$ of $\phi$ mesons to that of anti-protons ($v_{2}(\phi)/v_{2}(\bar{p})$) shows centrality dependence at low transverse momentum, presumably resulting from the larger effects from hadronic interactions on anti-proton $v_{2}$.
Notwithstanding decades of progress since Yukawa first developed a description of the force between nucleons in terms of meson exchange, a full understanding of the strong interaction remains a major challenge in modern science. One remaining difficulty arises from the non-perturbative nature of the strong force, which leads to the phenomenon of quark confinement at distances on the order of the size of the proton. Here we show that in relativistic heavy-ion collisions, where quarks and gluons are set free over an extended volume, two species of produced vector (spin-1) mesons, namely $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$, emerge with a surprising pattern of global spin alignment. In particular, the global spin alignment for $\phi$ is unexpectedly large, while that for $K^{*0}$ is consistent with zero. The observed spin-alignment pattern and magnitude for the $\phi$ cannot be explained by conventional mechanisms, while a model with a connection to strong force fields, i.e. an effective proxy description within the Standard Model and Quantum Chromodynamics, accommodates the current data. This connection, if fully established, will open a potential new avenue for studying the behaviour of strong force fields.
Global spin alignment of $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$ vector mesons in heavy-ion collisions. The measured matrix element $\rho_{00}$ as a function of beam energy for the $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$ vector mesons within the indicated windows of centrality, transverse momentum ($p_T$) and rapidity ($y$). The open symbols indicate ALICE results for Pb+Pb collisions at 2.76 TeV at $p_{T}$ values of 2.0 and 1.4 GeV/c for the $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$ mesons, respectively, corresponding to the $p_{T}$ bin nearest to the mean $p_{T}$ for the 1.0 – 5.0 GeV/$c$ range assumed for each meson in the present analysis. The red solid curve is a fit to data in the range of $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 19.6$ to 200 GeV, based on a theoretical calculation with a $\phi$-meson field. Parameter sensitivity of $\rho_{00}$ to the $\phi$-meson field is shown in Ref.5. The red dashed line is an extension of the solid curve with the fitted parameter $G_s^{(y)}$. The black dashed line represents $\rho_{00}=1/3.$
Global spin alignment of $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$ vector mesons in heavy-ion collisions. The measured matrix element $\rho_{00}$ as a function of beam energy for the $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$ vector mesons within the indicated windows of centrality, transverse momentum ($p_T$) and rapidity ($y$). The open symbols indicate ALICE results for Pb+Pb collisions at 2.76 TeV at $p_{T}$ values of 2.0 and 1.4 GeV/c for the $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$ mesons, respectively, corresponding to the $p_{T}$ bin nearest to the mean $p_{T}$ for the 1.0 – 5.0 GeV/$c$ range assumed for each meson in the present analysis. The red solid curve is a fit to data in the range of $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 19.6$ to 200 GeV, based on a theoretical calculation with a $\phi$-meson field. Parameter sensitivity of $\rho_{00}$ to the $\phi$-meson field is shown in Ref.5. The red dashed line is an extension of the solid curve with the fitted parameter $G_s^{(y)}$. The black dashed line represents $\rho_{00}=1/3.$
Example of combinatorial background subtracted invariant mass distributions and the extracted yields as a function of $\cos \theta^*$ for $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$ mesons. \textbf{a)} example of $\phi \rightarrow K^+ + K^-$ invariant mass distributions, with combinatorial background subtracted, integrated over $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{b)} example of $K^{*0} (\overline{K^{*0}}) \rightarrow K^{-} \pi^{+} (K^{+} \pi^{-})$ invariant mass distributions, with combinatorial background subtracted, integrated over $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{c)} extracted yields of $\phi$ as a function of $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{d)} extracted yields of $K^{*0}$ as a function of $\cos \theta^*$.
Example of combinatorial background subtracted invariant mass distributions and the extracted yields as a function of $\cos \theta^*$ for $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$ mesons. \textbf{a)} example of $\phi \rightarrow K^+ + K^-$ invariant mass distributions, with combinatorial background subtracted, integrated over $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{b)} example of $K^{*0} (\overline{K^{*0}}) \rightarrow K^{-} \pi^{+} (K^{+} \pi^{-})$ invariant mass distributions, with combinatorial background subtracted, integrated over $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{c)} extracted yields of $\phi$ as a function of $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{d)} extracted yields of $K^{*0}$ as a function of $\cos \theta^*$.
Example of combinatorial background subtracted invariant mass distributions and the extracted yields as a function of $\cos \theta^*$ for $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$ mesons. \textbf{a)} example of $\phi \rightarrow K^+ + K^-$ invariant mass distributions, with combinatorial background subtracted, integrated over $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{b)} example of $K^{*0} (\overline{K^{*0}}) \rightarrow K^{-} \pi^{+} (K^{+} \pi^{-})$ invariant mass distributions, with combinatorial background subtracted, integrated over $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{c)} extracted yields of $\phi$ as a function of $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{d)} extracted yields of $K^{*0}$ as a function of $\cos \theta^*$.
Example of combinatorial background subtracted invariant mass distributions and the extracted yields as a function of $\cos \theta^*$ for $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$ mesons. \textbf{a)} example of $\phi \rightarrow K^+ + K^-$ invariant mass distributions, with combinatorial background subtracted, integrated over $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{b)} example of $K^{*0} (\overline{K^{*0}}) \rightarrow K^{-} \pi^{+} (K^{+} \pi^{-})$ invariant mass distributions, with combinatorial background subtracted, integrated over $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{c)} extracted yields of $\phi$ as a function of $\cos \theta^*$; \textbf{d)} extracted yields of $K^{*0}$ as a function of $\cos \theta^*$.
Efficiency corrected $\phi$-meson yields as a function of cos$\theta$* and corresponding fits with Eq.1 in the method section.
Efficiency and acceptance corrected $K^{*0}$-meson yields as a function of cos$\theta$* and corresponding fits with Eq.4 in the method section.
$\phi$-meson $\rho_{00}$ obtained from 1st- and 2nd-order event planes. The red stars (gray squares) show the $\phi$-meson $\rho_{00}$ as a function of beam energy, obtained with the 2nd-order (1st-order) EP.
$\phi$-meson $\rho_{00}$ with respect to different quantization axes. $\phi$-meson $\rho_{00}$ as a function of beam energy, for the out-of-plane direction (stars) and the in-plane direction (diamonds). Curves are fits based on theoretical calculations with a $\phi$-meson field. The corresponding $G_s^{(y)}$ values obtained from the fits are shown in the legend.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $\phi$ for different collision energies. The gray squares and red stars are results obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $K^{*0}$ for different collision energies.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $K^{*0}$ for different collision energies.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $K^{*0}$ for different collision energies.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $K^{*0}$ for different collision energies.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $K^{*0}$ for different collision energies.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $K^{*0}$ for different collision energies.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of transverse momentum for $K^{*0}$ for different collision energies.
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of centrality for $\phi$ (upper panels) and $K^{*0}$ (lower panels). The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for the $K^{*0}$ meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.}
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of centrality for $\phi$ (upper panels) and $K^{*0}$ (lower panels). The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for the $K^{*0}$ meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.}
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of centrality for $\phi$ (upper panels) and $K^{*0}$ (lower panels). The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for the $K^{*0}$ meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.}
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of centrality for $\phi$ (upper panels) and $K^{*0}$ (lower panels). The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for the $K^{*0}$ meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.}
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of centrality for $\phi$ (upper panels) and $K^{*0}$ (lower panels). The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for the $K^{*0}$ meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.}
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of centrality for $\phi$ (upper panels) and $K^{*0}$ (lower panels). The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for the $K^{*0}$ meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.}
$\rho_{00}$ as a function of centrality for $\phi$ (upper panels) and $K^{*0}$ (lower panels). The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for the $K^{*0}$ meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.}
Global spin alignment measurement of $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$ vector mesons in Au+Au collisions at 0-20\% centrality. The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for $K^{*0}$-meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.
Global spin alignment measurement of $\phi$ and $K^{*0}$ vector mesons in Au+Au collisions at 0-20\% centrality. The solid squares and stars are results for the $\phi$ meson, obtained with the 1st- and 2nd-order EP, respectively. The solid circles are results for $K^{*0}$-meson, obtained with the 2nd-order EP.
The measurement of direct photons from Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}=39$ and 62.4 GeV in the transverse-momentum range $0.4<p_T<3$ Gev/$c$ is presented by the PHENIX collaboration at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider. A significant direct-photon yield is observed in both collision systems. A universal scaling is observed when the direct-photon $p_T$ spectra for different center-of-mass energies and for different centrality selections at $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}=62.4$ GeV is scaled with $(dN_{\rm ch}/d\eta)^{\alpha}$ for $\alpha=1.21{\pm}0.04$. This scaling also holds true for direct-photon spectra from Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}=200$ GeV measured earlier by PHENIX, as well as the spectra from Pb$+$Pb at $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}=2760$ GeV published by ALICE. The scaling power $\alpha$ seems to be independent of $p_T$, center of mass energy, and collision centrality. The spectra from different collision energies have a similar shape up to $p_T$ of 2 GeV/$c$. The spectra have a local inverse slope $T_{\rm eff}$ increasing with $p_T$ of $0.174\pm0.018$ GeV/$c$ in the range $0.4<p_T<1.3$ GeV/$c$ and increasing to $0.289\pm0.024$ GeV/$c$ for $0.9<p_T<2.1$ GeV/$c$. The observed similarity of low-$p_T$ direct-photon production from $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}= 39$ to 2760 GeV suggests a common source of direct photons for the different collision energies and event centrality selections, and suggests a comparable space-time evolution of direct-photon emission.
$R_{\gamma}$ for minimum bias (0-86%) Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 62.4$ GeV (a) and $39$ GeV (b). For $62.4$ GeV also centrality bins of 0-20% (c) and 20-40% (d) are shown. Data points are shown with statistical (bar) and systematic uncertainties (box)
$R_{\gamma}$ for minimum bias (0-86%) Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 62.4$ GeV (a) and $39$ GeV (b). For $62.4$ GeV also centrality bins of 0-20% (c) and 20-40% (d) are shown. Data points are shown with statistical (bar) and systematic uncertainties (box)
Direct photon spectra for minimum bias (0-86%) Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 62.4$ GeV (a) and $39$ GeV (b). For $62.4$ GeV also centrality bins of 0-20% (c) and 20-40% (d) are shown. Data points are shown with statistical and systematic uncertainties, unless the central value is negative (arrows) or is consistent with zero within the statistical uncertainties (arrows with data point). In these cases upper limit with CL = 95$%$ are given.
Direct photon spectra for minimum bias (0-86%) Au+Au collision at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 62.4$ GeV (a) and $39$ GeV (b). For $62.4$ GeV also centrality bins of 0-20% (c) and 20-40% (d) are shown. Data points are shown with statistical and systematic uncertainties, unless the central value is negative (arrows) or is consistent with zero within the statistical uncertainties (arrows with data point). In these cases upper limit with CL = 95$%$ are given.
Inverse slopes, $T_{eff}$ , obtained from fitting the combined data from central collisions shown in Fig. 11 is compared to the fit results of the individual data sets at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 62.4$ GeV, $200$ GeV, and $2760$ GeV. Also included is the value for $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 39$ GeV obtained from fitting the min. bias data set in the lower $p_T$ range.
Integrated invariant direct-photon yields vs. charged particle multiplicity for $p_{T}$ integrated from (a) 0.4 GeV/c, (b) 1.0 GeV/c, (c) 1.5 GeV/c, and (d) 2.0 to 5.0 GeV/c for all available A+A datasets.
Integrated invariant direct-photon yields vs. charged particle multiplicity for $p_{T}$ integrated from (a) 0.4 GeV/c, (b) 1.0 GeV/c, (c) 1.5 GeV/c, and (d) 2.0 to 5.0 GeV/c for all available A+A datasets.
Integrated invariant direct-photon yields vs. charged particle multiplicity for $p_{T}$ integrated from (a) 0.4 GeV/c, (b) 1.0 GeV/c, (c) 1.5 GeV/c, and (d) 2.0 to 5.0 GeV/c for all available A+A datasets.
Integrated invariant direct-photon yields vs. charged particle multiplicity for $p_{T}$ integrated from (a) 0.4 GeV/c, (b) 1.0 GeV/c, (c) 1.5 GeV/c, and (d) 2.0 to 5.0 GeV/c for all available A+A datasets.
Integrated direct-photon yields from A+A collisions for $p_{T,min}$ of $5$ GeV/c (a) and $8$ GeV/c. The representation is the same as in Fig. 13. Also shown are the results from pQCD calculations scaled by $N_{coll}$
Integrated direct-photon yields from A+A collisions for $p_{T,min}$ of $5$ GeV/c (a) and $8$ GeV/c. The representation is the same as in Fig. 13. Also shown are the results from pQCD calculations scaled by $N_{coll}$
The $\alpha$ values extracted using fits to integrated direct photon yields. The dashed line gives the average $\alpha$ value for the 4 lower $p_{T,min}$ points. Also shown is a model calculation for $\alpha$ discussed in the text.
Rapidity-odd directed flow measurements at midrapidity are presented for $\Lambda$, $\bar{\Lambda}$, $K^\pm$, $K^0_s$ and $\phi$ at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV in Au+Au collisions recorded by the STAR detector at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider. These measurements greatly expand the scope of data available to constrain models with differing prescriptions for the equation of state of quantum chromodynamics. Results show good sensitivity for testing a picture where flow is assumed to be imposed before hadron formation and the observed particles are assumed to form via coalescence of constituent quarks. The pattern of departure from a coalescence-inspired sum-rule can be a valuable new tool for probing the collision dynamics.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $p$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $p$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $p$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $p$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{p}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{p}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{p}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{p}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{+}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{+}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{+}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{+}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{-}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\Lambda$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{-}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\Lambda$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{-}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\Lambda$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{-}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\Lambda$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39 and 62.4 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39 and 62.4 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39 and 62.4 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\Lambda$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\Lambda$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.
Directed flow slope $dv_1/dy$ as a function of beam energy in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\Lambda$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 GeV.
Directed flow slope $dv_1/dy$ as a function of beam energy in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\Lambda$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow slope $dv_1/dy$ as a function of beam energy in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow slope $dv_1/dy$ as a function of beam energy in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39 and 62.4 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39 and 62.4 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39 and 62.4 GeV.
Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.
Directed flow slope $dv_1/dy$ as a function of beam energy in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions.
Directed flow slope $dv_1/dy$ as a function of beam energy in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions.
Directed flow slope $dv_1/dy$ as a function of beam energy in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions.
Directed flow slope $dv_1/dy$ as a function of beam energy in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions.
We present STAR measurements of strange hadron ($\mathrm{K}^{0}_{\mathrm S}$, $\Lambda$, $\overline{\Lambda}$, $\Xi^-$, $\overline{\Xi}^+$, $\Omega^-$, $\overline{\Omega}^+$, and $\phi$) production at mid-rapidity ($|y| < 0.5$) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}$ = 7.7 - 39 GeV from the Beam Energy Scan Program at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC). Transverse momentum spectra, averaged transverse mass, and the overall integrated yields of these strange hadrons are presented versus the centrality and collision energy. Antibaryon-to-baryon ratios ($\overline{\Lambda}$/$\Lambda$, $\overline{\Xi}^+$/$\Xi^-$, $\overline{\Omega}^+$/$\Omega^-$) are presented as well, and used to test a thermal statistical model and to extract the temperature normalized strangeness and baryon chemical potentials at hadronic freeze-out ($\mu_{B}/T_{\rm ch}$ and $\mu_{S}/T_{\rm ch}$) in central collisions. Strange baryon-to-pion ratios are compared to various model predictions in central collisions for all energies. The nuclear modification factors ($R_{\textrm{CP}}$) and antibaryon-to-meson ratios as a function of transverse momentum are presented for all collision energies. The $\mathrm{K}^{0}_{\mathrm S}$$R_{\textrm{CP}}$ shows no suppression for $p_{\rm T}$ up to 3.5 $\mathrm{GeV} / c$ at energies of 7.7 and 11.5 GeV. The $\overline{\Lambda}$/$\mathrm{K}^{0}_{\mathrm S}$ ratio also shows baryon-to-meson enhancement at intermediate $p_{\rm T}$ ($\approx$2.5 $\mathrm{GeV} / c$) in central collisions at energies above 19.6 GeV. Both observations suggest that there is likely a change of the underlying strange quark dynamics at collision energies below 19.6 GeV.
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
We report the first measurements of a complete second-order cumulant matrix of net-charge, net-proton, and net-kaon multiplicity distributions for the first phase of the beam energy scan program at RHIC. This includes the centrality and, for the first time, the pseudorapidity window dependence of both diagonal and off-diagonal cumulants in Au+Au collisions at \sNN~= 7.7-200 GeV. Within the available acceptance of $|\eta|<0.5$, the cumulants grow linearly with the pseudorapidity window. Relative to the corresponding measurements in peripheral collisions, the ratio of off-diagonal over diagonal cumulants in central collisions indicates an excess correlation between net-charge and net-kaon, as well as between net-charge and net-proton. The strength of such excess correlation increases with the collision energy. The correlation between net-proton and net-kaon multiplicity distributions is observed to be negative at \sNN~= 200 GeV and change to positive at the lowest collision energy. Model calculations based on non-thermal (UrQMD) and thermal (HRG) production of hadrons cannot explain the data. These measurements will help map the QCD phase diagram, constrain hadron resonance gas model calculations, and provide new insights on the energy dependence of baryon-strangeness correlations. An erratum has been added to address the issue of self-correlation in the previously considered efficiency correction for off-diagonal cumulant measurement. Previously considered unidentified (net-)charge correlation results ($\sigma^{11}_{Q,p}$ and $\sigma^{11}_{Q,k})$ are now replaced with identified (net-)charge correlation ($\sigma^{11}_{Q^{PID},p}$ and $\sigma^{11}_{Q^{PID},k}$)
The dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal and off-diagonal cumulants on the width of the η-window. The filled and open circles represent 0-5% and 70-80% central collisions respectively. The shaded band represents the systematic uncertainty. The statistical uncertainties are within the marker size and solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
The dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal and off-diagonal cumulants on the width of the η-window. The filled and open circles represent 0-5% and 70-80% central collisions respectively. The shaded band represents the systematic uncertainty. The statistical uncertainties are within the marker size and solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli- sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Error bars are statistical and boxes are systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Error bars are statistical and boxes are systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Beam energy dependence of cumulant ratios (Cp,k,CQ,k and CQ,p; top to bottom) of net-proton, net-kaon and net-charge (identified) for Au+Au collisions at sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The bands denote the UrQMD calculations for 0-5% and 70-80% central collisions and the HRG values are denoted by red dotted lines. The Poisson baseline is denoted by black dashed lines. Error bars are statistical and boxes are systematic errors.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Beam energy dependence of cumulant ratios (Cp,k,CQ,k and CQ,p; top to bottom) of net-proton, net-kaon and identified net-charge for Au+Au collisions at sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The bands denote the UrQMD calculations for 0-5% and 70-80% central collisions and the HRG values are denoted by red dotted lines. The Poisson baseline is denoted by black dashed lines. Bars show statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors.
The extreme temperatures and energy densities generated by ultra-relativistic collisions between heavy nuclei produce a state of matter with surprising fluid properties. Non-central collisions have angular momentum on the order of 1000$\hbar$, and the resulting fluid may have a strong vortical structure that must be understood to properly describe the fluid. It is also of particular interest because the restoration of fundamental symmetries of quantum chromodynamics is expected to produce novel physical effects in the presence of strong vorticity. However, no experimental indications of fluid vorticity in heavy ion collisions have so far been found. Here we present the first measurement of an alignment between the angular momentum of a non-central collision and the spin of emitted particles, revealing that the fluid produced in heavy ion collisions is by far the most vortical system ever observed. We find that $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ hyperons show a positive polarization of the order of a few percent, consistent with some hydrodynamic predictions. A previous measurement that reported a null result at higher collision energies is seen to be consistent with the trend of our new observations, though with larger statistical uncertainties. These data provide the first experimental access to the vortical structure of the "perfect fluid" created in a heavy ion collision. They should prove valuable in the development of hydrodynamic models that quantitatively connect observations to the theory of the Strong Force. Our results extend the recent discovery of hydrodynamic spin alignment to the subatomic realm.
Lambda and AntiLambda polarization as a function of collision energy. A 0.8% error on the alpha value used in the paper is corrected in this table. Systematic error bars include those associated with particle identification (negligible), uncertainty in the value of the hyperon decay parameter (2%) and reaction plane resolution (2%) and detector efficiency corrections (4%). The dominant systematic error comes from statistical fluctuations of the estimated combinatoric background under the (anti-)$\Lambda$ mass peak.
Lambda and AntiLambda polarization as a function of collision energy calculated using the new $\alpha_\Lambda=0.732$ updated on PDG2020. Systematic error bars include those associated with particle identification (negligible), uncertainty in the value of the hyperon decay parameter (2%) and reaction plane resolution (2%) and detector efficiency corrections (4%). The dominant systematic error comes from statistical fluctuations of the estimated combinatoric background under the (anti-)$\Lambda$ mass peak.
Elliptic flow (v_2) values for identified particles at midrapidity in Au + Au collisions measured by the STAR experiment in the Beam Energy Scan at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at sqrt{s_{NN}}= 7.7--62.4 GeV are presented for three centrality classes. The centrality dependence and the data at sqrt{s_{NN}}= 14.5 GeV are new. Except at the lowest beam energies we observe a similar relative v_2 baryon-meson splitting for all centrality classes which is in agreement within 15% with the number-of-constituent quark scaling. The larger v_2 for most particles relative to antiparticles, already observed for minimum bias collisions, shows a clear centrality dependence, with the largest difference for the most central collisions. Also, the results are compared with A Multiphase Transport Model and fit with a Blast Wave model.
No description provided.
The difference in $v_{2}$ between particles (X) and their corresponding antiparticles $\bar{X}$ (see legend) as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ for 10%-40% central Au + Au collisions. The systematic errors are shown by the hooked error bars. The dashed lines in the plot are fits with a power-law function.
No description provided.
The difference in $v_{2}$ between protons and antiprotons as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ for 0%-10%, 10%-40% and 40%-80% central Au + Au collisions. The systematic errors are shown by the hooked error bars. The dashed lines in the plot are fits with a power-law function.
No description provided.
The relative difference. The systematic errors are shown by the hooked error bars. The dashed lines in the plot are fits with a power-law function.
No description provided.
The $v_{2}$ difference between protons and antiprotons (and between $\pi^{+}$ and $pi^{-}$) for 10%-40% centrality Au+Au collisions at 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, and 19.6 GeV. The $v_{2}{BBC} results were slightly shifted horizontally.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
According to first-principle lattice QCD calculations, the transition from quark-gluon plasma to hadronic matter is a smooth crossover in the region μB ≤ T c. In this range the ratio, C6=C2, of net-baryon distributions are predicted to be negative. In this Letter, we report the first measurement of the midrapidity net-proton C6=C2 from 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV Au þ Au collisions at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC). The dependence on collision centrality and kinematic acceptance in (p T , y) are analyzed. While for 27 and 54.4 GeV collisions the C6=C2 values are close to zero within uncertainties, it is observed that for 200 GeV collisions, the C6=C2 ratio becomes progressively negative from peripheral to central collisions. Transport model calculations without critical dynamics predict mostly positive values except for the most central collisions within uncertainties. These observations seem to favor a smooth crossover in the high-energy nuclear collisions at top RHIC energy.
Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.
Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.
Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.
Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.
Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.
Event by event net-proton multiplicity, $\Delta N_{p}$, distributions for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV in 0-10% and 30-40% centralities at midrapidity (|y| < 0.5) for the transverse momentum range of 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. These distributions are normalized by the corresponding numbers of events and are not corrected for detector efficiencies. Statistical uncertainties are shown as vertical lines. The dashed lines show the Skellam distributions for each collision energy and centrality. The bottom panel shows the ratio of the data to the Skellam expectations.
Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.
Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.
Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.
Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.
Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.
Net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ as a function of rapidity (left) and transverse momentum acceptance (right) from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV (crosses), 54.4 (open squares), and 200 GeV (filled circles) Au+Au collisions. The upper and lower plots are for 0-10% and 30-40% centralities, respectively. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. UrQMD transport model results are shown as shaded and hatched bands. The Skellam expectation ($C_{6}/C_{2} = 1) is shown as long-dashed lines.
Collisions centrality dependence of net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ in Au+Au collisions for |$y$| < 0.5 and 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. A shaded band shows the results from UrQMD model calculations. UrQMD calculations from the above three collision energies are consistent among them so they are merged in order to reduce statistical fluctuations. Details on these calculations can be found in the Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher]. The lattice QCD calculations [16, 17] for T = 160 MeV and $\mu_{B}$ < 110 MeV. are shown as a blue band at $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ $\approx$ 340.
Collisions centrality dependence of net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ in Au+Au collisions for |$y$| < 0.5 and 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. A shaded band shows the results from UrQMD model calculations. UrQMD calculations from the above three collision energies are consistent among them so they are merged in order to reduce statistical fluctuations. Details on these calculations can be found in the Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher]. The lattice QCD calculations [16, 17] for T = 160 MeV and $\mu_{B}$ < 110 MeV. are shown as a blue band at $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ $\approx$ 340.
Collisions centrality dependence of net-proton $C_{6}/C_{2}$ in Au+Au collisions for |$y$| < 0.5 and 0.4 < $p_{T}$ (GeV/c) < 2.0. The error bars are statistical and caps are systematic errors. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. A shaded band shows the results from UrQMD model calculations. UrQMD calculations from the above three collision energies are consistent among them so they are merged in order to reduce statistical fluctuations. Details on these calculations can be found in the Supplemental Material at [URL will be inserted by publisher]. The lattice QCD calculations [16, 17] for T = 160 MeV and $\mu_{B}$ < 110 MeV. are shown as a blue band at $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ $\approx$ 340.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Distributions of reconstructed protons (black circles) from embedding simulations in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-2.5% centrality. Red lines are fits with the binomial distribution, and green dotted lines represent the fit with the beta-binomial distributions using α that gives the minimal chi2/ndf. Each panel shows the result from the given combinations of embedded protons and antiprotons. The ratio of fits to the embedding data is shown for each panel.
Cumulants and their ratios up to the sixth order corrected for non-binomial efficiencies for 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at 0-5% centrality. The CBWC is applied for 2.5% centrality bin width. Results from the conventional efficiency correction are shown as black filled circles, results from the unfolding with the binomial detector response are shown as black open circles, and results from beta-binomial detector response with $\alpha+\sigma$, $\alpha$ and $\alpha-\sigma$ are shown in green triangles, red squares and blue triangles, respectively. C5, C6, C2/C1, C5/C1 and C6/C2 are scaled by constant shown in each column.
Collision centrality dependence of net-proton C6/C2 in Au+Au collisions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV within |y| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT (GeV/c) < 2.0. Results with and without the CBWC are overlaid. The results are corrected for detector efficiencies. Points for different calculation methods are staggered horizontally to improve clarity.
Collision centrality dependence of net-proton C6/C2 in Au+Au collisions for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27, 54.4, and 200 GeV within |y| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT (GeV/c) < 2.0. Points for different beam energies are staggered horizontally to improve clarity. Shaded and hatched bands show the results from UrQMD model calculations The lattice QCD calculations [13, 14] for T = 160 MeV and $\mu_{B}$ < 110 MeV. are shown as a blue band at $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ $\approx$ 340.
The two-particle angular correlation functions, $R_2$, of pions, kaons, and protons in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4, and 200 GeV were measured by the STAR experiment at RHIC. These correlations were measured for both like-sign and unlike-sign charge combinations and versus the centrality. The correlations of pions and kaons show the expected near-side ({\it i.e.}, at small relative angles) peak resulting from short-range mechanisms. The amplitudes of these short-range correlations decrease with increasing beam energy. However, the proton correlation functions exhibit strong anticorrelations in the near-side region. This behavior is observed for the first time in an A+A collision system. The observed anticorrelation is $p_{T}$-independent and decreases with increasing beam energy and centrality. The experimental results are also compared to the Monte Carlo models UrQMD, Hijing, and AMPT.
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 7.7 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 11.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 14.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 19.6 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 27 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 39 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 64.2 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 200 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 7.7 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 11.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 14.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 19.6 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 27 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 39 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 64.2 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 200 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 7.7 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 11.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 14.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 19.6 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 27 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 39 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 64.2 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 200 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 7.7 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 11.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 14.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 19.6 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 27 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 39 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 64.2 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 200 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like- sign kaons in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV, mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign kaons in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV, mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) pions in Au+Au collisions at 30%-40% centrality and eight different energies from 7.7 GeV (top left) to 200 GeV (bottom right). Also shown at the highest beam energies in the right frames are the antiproton-antiproton correlations.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) protons in Au+Au collisions at 30%-40% centrality and eight different energies from 7.7 GeV (top left) to 200 GeV (bottom right). Also shown at the highest beam energies in the right frames are the antiproton-antiproton correlations.
Near-side and away-side ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ projection of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) pions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom), 30%-40% centrality.
Near-side and away-side ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ projection of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) protons in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom), 30%-40% centrality.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) pions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom), 30%-40% centrality compared with the UrQMD (solid line), Hijing (dash-dotted line), and AMPT (dotted line) simulations.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) protons in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom), 30%-40% centrality compared with the UrQMD (solid line), Hijing (dash-dotted line), and AMPT (dotted line) simulations.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) pions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom) for the most central 0%-5%, mid-central 30%-40% and pe- ripheral 60%-70% events.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) protons in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom) for the most central 0%-5%, mid-central 30%-40% and pe- ripheral 60%-70% events.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) pions in low and high pT in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom) in 30%-40% centrality.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) protons in low and high pT in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom) in 30%-40% centrality.
The measurements of particle multiplicity distributions have generated considerable interest in understanding the fluctuations of conserved quantum numbers in the Quantum Chromodynamics (QCD) hadronization regime, in particular near a possible critical point and near the chemical freeze-out. We report the measurement of efficiency and centrality bin width corrected cumulant ratios ($C_{2}/C_{1}$, $C_{3}/C_{2}$) of net-$\Lambda$ distributions, in the context of both strangeness and baryon number conservation, as a function of collision energy, centrality and rapidity. The results are for Au + Au collisions at five beam energies ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV) recorded with the Solenoidal Tracker at RHIC (STAR). We compare our results to the Poisson and negative binomial (NBD) expectations, as well as to Ultra-relativistic Quantum Molecular Dynamics (UrQMD) and Hadron Resonance Gas (HRG) model predictions. Both NBD and Poisson baselines agree with data within the statistical and systematic uncertainties. The ratios of the measured cumulants show no features of critical fluctuations. The chemical freeze-out temperatures extracted from a recent HRG calculation, which was successfully used to describe the net-proton, net-kaon and net-charge data, indicate $\Lambda$ freeze-out conditions similar to those of kaons. However, large deviations are found when comparing to temperatures obtained from net-proton fluctuations. The net-$\Lambda$ cumulants show a weak, but finite, dependence on the rapidity coverage in the acceptance of the detector, which can be attributed to quantum number conservation.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C1, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 19.6 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions. Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C1, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 27 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C1, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 39 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C1, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 62.4 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C1, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 200 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C2, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 19.6 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C2, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 27 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C2, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 39 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C2, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 62.4 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C2, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 200 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C3, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 19.6 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C3, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 27 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C3, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 39 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C3, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 62.4 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of single cumulants C3, of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 200 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C2/C1, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 19.6 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C2/C1, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 27 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C2/C1, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 39 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C2/C1, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 62.4 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C2/C1, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 200 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C3/C2, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 19.6 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C3/C2, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 27 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C3/C2, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 39 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C3/C2, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 62.4 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Centrality dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratio C3/C2, as a function of net-lambda multiplicity distributions at Au + Au collision 200 GeV. Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.Npart values are from Phys. Rev. C 104, 024902 (2021) and they are little different than the values shown in the original paper.
Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C2/C1 in most central (0-5%) and peripheral (50-60%). Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.
Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C3/C2 in most central (0-5%) and peripheral (50-60%). Values are shown with NBD, Poisson and UrQMD predictions.
Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda, net-proton and net-kaon cumulant ratios C2/C1 in most central (0-5%) collision.
Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda, net-proton and net-kaon cumulant ratios C3/C2 in most central (0-5%) collision.
Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C2/C1 in most central (0-5%) collision, along with results from HRG.
Beam-energy dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C3/C2 in most central (0-5%) collision, along with results from HRG.
Rapidity dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C2/C1 in most central (0-5%) collision, along with results from NBD.
Rapidity dependence of net-lambda cumulant ratios C3/C2 in most central (0-5%) collision, along with results from NBD.
Rapidity dependence of normalized C2 in most central (0-5%) collision at Au+Au 19.6 GeV.
Rapidity dependence of normalized C2 in most central (0-5%) collision at Au+Au 200 GeV.
We report a systematic measurement of cumulants, $C_{n}$, for net-proton, proton and antiproton multiplicity distributions, and correlation functions, $\kappa_n$, for proton and antiproton multiplicity distributions up to the fourth order in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm {NN}}}$ = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 54.4, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The $C_{n}$ and $\kappa_n$ are presented as a function of collision energy, centrality and kinematic acceptance in rapidity, $y$, and transverse momentum, $p_{T}$. The data were taken during the first phase of the Beam Energy Scan (BES) program (2010 -- 2017) at the BNL Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) facility. The measurements are carried out at midrapidity ($|y| <$ 0.5) and transverse momentum 0.4 $<$$p_{\rm T}$$<$ 2.0 GeV/$c$, using the STAR detector at RHIC. We observe a non-monotonic energy dependence ($\sqrt{s_{\mathrm {NN}}}$ = 7.7 -- 62.4 GeV) of the net-proton $C_{4}$/$C_{2}$ with the significance of 3.1$\sigma$ for the 0-5% central Au+Au collisions. This is consistent with the expectations of critical fluctuations in a QCD-inspired model. Thermal and transport model calculations show a monotonic variation with $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm {NN}}}$. For the multiparticle correlation functions, we observe significant negative values for a two-particle correlation function, $\kappa_2$, of protons and antiprotons, which are mainly due to the effects of baryon number conservation. Furthermore, it is found that the four-particle correlation function, $\kappa_4$, of protons plays a role in determining the energy dependence of proton $C_4/C_1$ below 19.6 GeV, which cannot be understood by the effect of baryon number conservation.
We report on K*0 production at mid-rapidity in Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at \sqrt{s_{NN}} = 62.4 and 200 GeV collected by the Solenoid Tracker at RHIC (STAR) detector. The K*0 is reconstructed via the hadronic decays K*0 \to K+ pi- and \bar{K*0} \to K-pi+. Transverse momentum, pT, spectra are measured over a range of pT extending from 0.2 GeV/c to 5 GeV/c. The center of mass energy and system size dependence of the rapidity density, dN/dy, and the average transverse momentum, <pT>, are presented. The measured N(K*0)/N(K) and N(\phi)/N(K*0) ratios favor the dominance of re-scattering of decay daughters of K*0 over the hadronic regeneration for the K*0 production. In the intermediate pT region (2.0 < pT < 4.0 GeV/c), the elliptic flow parameter, v2, and the nuclear modification factor, RCP, agree with the expectations from the quark coalescence model of particle production.
The K$\pi$ pair invariant mass distribution integrated over the $K^{*0}$ $p_T$ for minimum bias Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ =200 GeV after mixed-event background subtraction.
The K$\pi$ pair invariant mass distribution integrated over the $K^{*0}$ $p_T$ for minimum bias Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ =62.4 GeV after mixed-event background subtraction.
The K$\pi$ pair invariant mass distribution integrated over the $K^{*0}$ $p_T$ for minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ =200 GeV after mixed-event background subtraction.
The K$\pi$ pair invariant mass distribution integrated over the $K^{*0}$ $p_T$ for minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ =62.4 GeV after mixed-event background subtraction.
The Kπ pair invariant mass distribution for various pT bins (top left) pT = 0.4–0.6 GeV/c in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 200 GeV after the mixed-event background subtraction.
The Kπ pair invariant mass distribution for various pT bins (top right) pT = 0.6–0.8 GeV/c in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV after the mixed-event background subtraction.
The Kπ pair invariant mass distribution for various pT bins (bottom left) pT = 0.8–1.0 GeV/c in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 200 GeV after the mixed-event background subtraction.
The Kπ pair invariant mass distribution for various pT bins (bottom right) pT = 1.0–1.2 GeV/c in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV after the mixed-event background subtraction.
The signal-to-background ratio for $K^{*0}$ measurements as a function of $p_T$ for different collision centrality bins (0-10%, 10-40%, 40-60%, 60-80%) in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV.
$K^{*0}$ mass as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.
$K^{*0}$ mass as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.
$K^{*0}$ mass as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV
$K^{*0}$ mass as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV
$K^{*0}$ width as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV
$K^{*0}$ width as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV
$K^{*0}$ width as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV
$K^{*0}$ width as a function of $p_T$ for minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV
The $K^{*0}$ reconstruction efficiency multiplied by the detector acceptance as a function of $p_T$ in Au+Au (|$\eta$| < 0.8) collisions at 200 GeV for different collision centrality bins (0-20% ,20-40% , 40-60%)
The $K^{*0}$ reconstruction efficiency multiplied by the detector acceptance as a function of $p_T$ in Cu+Cu (|$\eta$| < 1.0) collisions at 200 GeV for different collision centrality bins (0-20% ,20-40% , 40-60%)
Mid-rapidity $K^{*0}$ $p_T$ spectra for various collision centrality bins (0-20%, 20-40%, 40-60%, 60-80%) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV
Mid-rapidity $K^{*0}$ $p_T$ spectra for various collision centrality bins (0-20%, 20-40%, 40-60%) in Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV
Mid-rapidity $K^{*0}$ $p_T$ spectra for various collision centrality bins (0-20%, 20-40%, 40-60%, 60-80%) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV
Mid-rapidity $K^{*0}$ $p_T$ spectra for various collision centrality bins (0-20%, 20-40%, 40-60%) in Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV
The mid-rapidity yields dN/dy of $K^{*0}$ as a function of the average number of participating nucleons, $⟨N_{part}⟩$, for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV
The mid-rapidity yields dN/dy of $K^{*0}$ as a function of the average number of participating nucleons, $⟨N_{part}⟩$, for Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV
The mid-rapidity yields dN/dy of $K^{*0}$ as a function of the average number of participating nucleons, $⟨N_{part}⟩$, for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV
The mid-rapidity yields dN/dy of $K^{*0}$ as a function of the average number of participating nucleons, $⟨N_{part}⟩$, for Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV
The mid-rapidity $K^{*0}$ $⟨p_T⟩$ as a function $⟨N_{part}⟩$ for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV
The mid-rapidity $K^{*0}$ $⟨p_T⟩$ as a function $⟨N_{part}⟩$ for Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV
The mid-rapidity $K^{*0}$ $⟨p_T⟩$ as a function $⟨N_{part}⟩$ for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV
The mid-rapidity $K^{*0}$ $⟨p_T⟩$ as a function $⟨N_{part}⟩$ for Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV
The mid-rapidity $⟨p_T⟩$ of $\pi$, K, p and $K^{*0}$ as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$ for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.
Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$
Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$
Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$
Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$
Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})N(K^-)$ in Au+Au collisions divided by $N(K^{*0})N(K^-)$ ratio in p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$.
Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})N(K^-)$ in Cu+Cu collisions divided by $N(K^{*0})N(K^-)$ ratio in p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$
Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})N(K^-)$ in d+Au collisions divided by $N(K^{*0})N(K^-)$ ratio in d+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$
Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio in minimum bias Au+Au collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}.
Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio in minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}.
Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio in minimum bias p+p collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}.
Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio in minimum bias Au+Au collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}.
Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio in minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}.
Mid-rapidity $N(K^{*0})/N(K^-)$ ratio in minimum bias p+p collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}.
Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$
Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$
Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio for Au+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$
Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio for Cu+Cu at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$
Mid-rapidity $[N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})]$ in Au+Au collisions divided by $[N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})]$ ratio in p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$
Mid-rapidity $[N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})]$ in Cu+Cu collisions divided by $[N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})]$ ratio in p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$
Mid-rapidity $[N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})]$ in d+Au collisions divided by $[N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})]$ ratio in p+p collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV as a function of $⟨N_{part}⟩$
Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio in minimum bias Au+Au collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$.
Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio in minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$.
Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio in minimum bias p+p collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$.
Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio in minimum bias Au+Au collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$.
Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio in minimum bias Cu+Cu collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$.
Mid-rapidity $N(\phi)/N(K^{*0})$ ratio in minimum bias p+p collisions as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$.
The $K^{*0}$ $v_2$ (Run IV) as a function of $p_T$ in minimum bias Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.
The $K^{*0}$ $v_2$ (Run II) as a function of $p_T$ in minimum bias Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.
The $K^{*0}$ $R_{CP}$ as a function of $p_T$ in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 and 200 GeV compared to the $R_{CP}$ of $K^0_S$ and $\Lambda$ at 200 GeV.
The $K^{*0}$ $R_{CP}$ as a function of $p_T$ in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 and 200 GeV compared to the $R_{CP}$ of $K^0_S$ and $\Lambda$ at 200 GeV.
The $K^{*0}$ $R_{CP}$ as a function of $p_T$ in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 and 200 GeV compared to the $R_{CP}$ of $K^0_S$ and $\Lambda$ at 200 GeV.
The $K^{*0}$ ~$R_{CP}$~ as a function of $p_T$ in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 and 200 GeV compared to the $R_{CP}$ of $K^0_S$ and $\Lambda$ at 200 GeV.
Measurements of the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, of identified hadrons ($\pi^{\pm}$, $K^{\pm}$, $K_{s}^{0}$, $p$, $\bar{p}$, $\phi$, $\Lambda$, $\bar{\Lambda}$, $\Xi^{-}$, $\bar{\Xi}^{+}$, $\Omega^{-}$, $\bar{\Omega}^{+}$) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 7.7, 11.5, 19.6, 27, 39 and 62.4 GeV are presented. The measurements were done at mid-rapidity using the Time Projection Chamber and the Time-of-Flight detectors of the STAR experiment during the Beam Energy Scan program at RHIC. A significant difference in the $v_{2}$ values for particles and the corresponding anti-particles was observed at all transverse momenta for the first time. The difference increases with decreasing center-of-mass energy, $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ (or increasing baryon chemical potential, $\mu_{B}$) and is larger for the baryons as compared to the mesons. This implies that particles and anti-particles are no longer consistent with the universal number-of-constituent quark (NCQ) scaling of $v_{2}$ that was observed at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 200 GeV. However, for the group of particles NCQ scaling at $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}>$ 0.4 GeV/$c^{2}$ is not violated within $\pm$10%. The $v_{2}$ values for $\phi$ mesons at 7.7 and 11.5 GeV are approximately two standard deviations from the trend defined by the other hadrons at the highest measured $p_{T}$ values.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged koans as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged koans as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged koans as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged koans as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged koans as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged koans as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged koans as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged koans as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of Λ,Λbar as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions
The elliptic flow,v_2, of $\phi$ mesons as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of $\phi$ mesons as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of $\phi$ mesons as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of $\phi$ mesons as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of $\phi$ mesons as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of $\phi$ mesons as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of Λ,Λbar as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of √sNN for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of √sNN for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of √sNN for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of √sNN for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of √sNN for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of $μ_B$ for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of $μ_B$ for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of $μ_B$ for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of $μ_B$ for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of $μ_B$ for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The proton and anti-proton elliptic flow for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions at √sNN= 19.6 GeV, where “(+,-) EP” refers to the event plane reconstructed using all of the charged particles and “(-) EP” refers to the event plane reconstructed using only the negatively charged particles.
We report systematic measurements of bulk properties of the system created in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$ = 14.5 GeV recorded by the STAR detector at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC).The transverse momentum spectra of $\pi^{\pm}$, $K^{\pm}$ and $p(\bar{p})$ are studied at mid-rapidity ($|y| < 0.1$) for nine centrality intervals. The centrality, transverse momentum ($p_T$),and pseudorapidity ($\eta$) dependence of inclusive charged particle elliptic flow ($v_2$), and rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow ($v_{1}$) results near mid-rapidity are also presented. These measurements are compared with the published results from Au+Au collisions at other energies, and from Pb+Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$ = 2.76 TeV. The results at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$ = 14.5 GeV show similar behavior as established at other energies and fit well in the energy dependence trend. These results are important as the 14.5 GeV energy fills the gap in $\mu_B$, which is of the order of 100 MeV,between $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$ =11.5 and 19.6 GeV. Comparisons of the data with UrQMD and AMPT models show poor agreement in general.
The $p_{T}$ spectra of proton measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicated in the legend
The $p_{T}$ spectra of antiproton measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicatedin the legend
The $p_{T}$ spectra of $\pi^{+}$ measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicatedin the legend
The $p_{T}$ spectra of $\pi^{-}$ measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicatedin the legend
The $p_{T}$ spectra of $K^{+}$ measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicatedin the legend
The $p_{T}$ spectra of $K^{-}$ measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicatedin the legend
Average $p_{T}$ of $\pi^{+}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Average $p_{T}$ of $\pi^{-}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Average $p_{T}$ of $K^{+}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Average $p_{T}$ of $K^{-}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$= 14.5 GeV.
Average $p_{T}$ of p as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Average $p_{T}$ of p-bar as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of $\pi^{+}$ scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of $\pi^{-}$ scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of $K^{+}$ scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of $K^{-}$ scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of proton scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of p-bar scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Kinetic freeze-out temperature as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Velocity as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
The event plane resolution calculated for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV as a function of centrality.
Inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 at mid-pseudorapidity (|y| <1.0) as a function of $p_{T}$ for 10-20% centrality in Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 at mid-pseudorapidity (|y| <1.0) as a function of $p_{T}$ for 20-30% centrality in Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 at mid-pseudorapidity (|y| <1.0) as a function of $p_{T}$ for 30-40% centrality in Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 at mid-pseudorapidity (|y| <1.0) as a function of transverse momentum $p_{T}$ for six centrality classes, obtained using the $\eta$-sub event plane method in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 at mid-pseudorapidity (|y| <1.0) as a function of $p_{T}$-integrated v2($\eta$) for six centrality classes, obtained using the $\eta$-sub event plane method in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
The ratio inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 over root-mean-square participant eccentricity $Epart_{2}$ at mid-pseudorapidity as a function of $p_{T}$ for 10–20%, 30–40%, and 50–60% collision centralities in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Summary of centrality bins, average number of participants $N_{part}$, number of binary collisions $N_{coll}$, reaction plane eccentricity eRP, participant eccentricity epart, root-mean-square of the participant eccentricity epart{2}, and transverse area $S_{part}$ from MC Glauber simulations at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
The inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2($\eta$-sub) versus pseudorapidity $\eta$ at mid-pseudorapidity for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27.0 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39.0 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27.0 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39.0 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 – 39 GeV for 30-60% centrality intervals.
We present STAR measurements of azimuthal anisotropy by means of the two- and four-particle cumulants $v_2$ ($v_2\{2\}$ and $v_2\{4\}$) for Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at center of mass energies $\sqrt{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}} = 62.4$ and 200 GeV. The difference between $v_2\{2\}^2$ and $v_2\{4\}^2$ is related to $v_{2}$ fluctuations ($\sigma_{v_2}$) and nonflow $(\delta_{2})$. We present an upper limit to $\sigma_{v_2}/v_{2}$. Following the assumption that eccentricity fluctuations $\sigma_{\epsilon}$ dominate $v_2$ fluctuations $\frac{\sigma_{v_2}}{v_2} \approx \frac{\sigma_{\epsilon}}{\epsilon}$ we deduce the nonflow implied for several models of eccentricity fluctuations that would be required for consistency with $v_2\{2\}$ and $v_2\{4\}$. We also present results on the ratio of $v_2$ to eccentricity.
The two-particle cumulant $v_2\{2\}^2$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 and 62.4 GeV. Results are shown with like-sign combinations (LS) and charge-independent results (CI) for $0.15 < p_T < 2.0$ GeV/$c$.
The two-particle cumulant $v_2\{2\}^2$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 and 62.4 GeV. Results are shown with like-sign combinations (LS) and charge-independent results (CI) for $0.15 < p_T < 2.0$ GeV/$c$.
The same as the left but for Cu+Cu collisions. The systematic errors are shown as thin lines with wide caps at the ends and statistical errors are shown as thick lines with small caps at the end. Statistical and systematic errors are very small.
The same as the left but for Cu+Cu collisions. The systematic errors are shown as thin lines with wide caps at the ends and statistical errors are shown as thick lines with small caps at the end. Statistical and systematic errors are very small.
The difference of charge-independent (CI) v2{2} and like-sign (LS) $v_2\{2\}$ for Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at 200 (top panel) and 62.4 (bottom panel) GeV vs. the log of $\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta\rangle$.The statistical errors are smaller than the marker size and not visible for most of the data.
The difference of charge-independent (CI) v2{2} and like-sign (LS) $v_2\{2\}$ for Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at 200 (top panel) and 62.4 (bottom panel) GeV vs. the log of $\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta\rangle$.The statistical errors are smaller than the marker size and not visible for most of the data.
The difference of charge-independent (CI) v2{2} and like-sign (LS) $v_2\{2\}$ for Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at 200 (top panel) and 62.4 (bottom panel) GeV vs. the log of $\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta\rangle$.The statistical errors are smaller than the marker size and not visible for most of the data.
The difference of charge-independent (CI) v2{2} and like-sign (LS) $v_2\{2\}$ for Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at 200 (top panel) and 62.4 (bottom panel) GeV vs. the log of $\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta\rangle$.The statistical errors are smaller than the marker size and not visible for most of the data.
The LS and CI four-particle cumulant $v_2\{4\}^4$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 and 62.4 GeV for $0.15 < pT < 2.0$ GeV/$c$. The systematic errors are shown as narrow lines with wide caps at the end and statistical errors are shown as thick lines with narrow caps at the end. Statistical errors are not visible for most of the points.
The LS and CI four-particle cumulant $v_2\{4\}^4$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 and 62.4 GeV for $0.15 < pT < 2.0$ GeV/$c$. The systematic errors are shown as narrow lines with wide caps at the end and statistical errors are shown as thick lines with narrow caps at the end. Statistical errors are not visible for most of the points.
The LS and CI four-particle cumulant $v_2\{4\}^4$ for Cu+Cu collisions at 200 and 62.4 GeV for $0.15 < p_T < 2.0$ GeV/c. The most central points (two points for Cu+Cu 62.4 GeV) gives $v_2\{4\}^4 < 0$ for all the data sets. The negative values are probably due to large fluctuations in agreement with Eq. (1). These may include contributions from impact parameter spread and finite multiplicity bin width.
The LS and CI four-particle cumulant $v_2\{4\}^4$ for Cu+Cu collisions at 200 and 62.4 GeV for $0.15 < p_T < 2.0$ GeV/c. The most central points (two points for Cu+Cu 62.4 GeV) gives $v_2\{4\}^4 < 0$ for all the data sets. The negative values are probably due to large fluctuations in agreement with Eq. (1). These may include contributions from impact parameter spread and finite multiplicity bin width.
The difference of charge-independent (CI) $v_2\{4\}$ and like-sign (LS) $v_2\{4\}$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 and 62.4 GeV vs. the log of $\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta\rangle$.
The difference of charge-independent (CI) $v_2\{4\}$ and like-sign (LS) $v_2\{4\}$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 and 62.4 GeV vs. the log of $\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta\rangle$.
(Left) The difference between $v_2\{2\}^2$ and $v_2\{4\}^2$ for 200 GeV Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions for both LS and CI combinations.
(Right) The difference between $v_2\{2\}^2$ and $v_2\{4\}^2$ for 62.4 GeV Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions for both LS and CI combinations. The statistical and systematic errors are shown as in previous figures.
The upper limit on $\sigma_{v_2}/\langle v_2 \rangle$ for 200 GeV (left) and 62.4 GeV (right) Au+Au collisions from Eq. (9) compared to $\sigma_\varepsilon/\varepsilon$ from Eq. (10) for three different models. The upper limit is found using the LS results for $v_2\{2\}$. Data are from the range $0.15 < p_T < 2.0$ GeV/$c$. The shaded bands reflect the uncertainties on the models which are dominated by uncertainty on the distribution of nucleons inside the nucleus. The uncertainty is only shown for the MCG-N and fKLN-CGC models. The uncertainty on the MCG-Q model is the same as for the MCG-N model but is not shown for the visual clarity.
The upper limit on $\sigma_{v_2}/\langle v_2 \rangle$ for 200 GeV (left) and 62.4 GeV (right) Au+Au collisions from Eq. (9) compared to $\sigma_\varepsilon/\varepsilon$ from Eq. (10) for three different models. The upper limit is found using the LS results for $v_2\{2\}$. Data are from the range $0.15 < p_T < 2.0$ GeV/$c$. The shaded bands reflect the uncertainties on the models which are dominated by uncertainty on the distribution of nucleons inside the nucleus. The uncertainty is only shown for the MCG-N and fKLN-CGC models. The uncertainty on the MCG-Q model is the same as for the MCG-N model but is not shown for the visual clarity.
The STAR data compared to PHOBOS data [34] on $\sigma_{v_2}/\langle v_2 \rangle$ with $\delta_2$ for $\Delta\eta > 2$ taken to be zero (see Fig. 6 from Ref. [34]). The shaded band shows the errors quoted from Ref. [34].
The upper limit on $\sigma_{v_2}/\langle v_2 \rangle$ for 200 GeV (left) and 62.4 GeV (right) Cu+Cu collisions from Eq. (9) compared to $\sigma_\varepsilon/\varepsilon$ from Eq. (10) for three different models.
The upper limit on $\sigma_{v_2}/\langle v_2 \rangle$ for 200 GeV (left) and 62.4 GeV (right) Cu+Cu collisions from Eq. (9) compared to $\sigma_\varepsilon/\varepsilon$ from Eq. (10) for three different models.
When you search on a word, e.g. 'collisions', we will automatically search across everything we store about a record. But, sometimes you may wish to be more specific. Here we show you how.
Guidance and examples on the query string syntax can be found in the Elasticsearch documentation.
About HEPData Submitting to HEPData HEPData File Formats HEPData Coordinators HEPData Terms of Use HEPData Cookie Policy
Status Email Forum Twitter GitHub
Copyright ~1975-Present, HEPData | Powered by Invenio, funded by STFC, hosted and originally developed at CERN, supported and further developed at IPPP Durham.