$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}$ at $\sqrt{s}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}$ at $\sqrt{s}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}$ at $\sqrt{s}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}$ at $\sqrt{s}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}$ at $\sqrt{s}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$, $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$, $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$, $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$, $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$, $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$, $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$, $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}$ at $\sqrt{s}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$, $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}$ at $\sqrt{s}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$, $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}$ at $\sqrt{s}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$, $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}$ at $\sqrt{s}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$, $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}$ at $\sqrt{s}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{p}\mathrm{p}$ at $\sqrt{s}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$, $\mathrm{p}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$, $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$, $\mathrm{p}$, $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

Directed flow of charged particles as a function of pseudorapidity, for centrality 10%-70%.

Directed flow of charged particles as a function of pseudorapidity, for centrality 10%-70%.

Directed flow of charged particles as a function of pseudorapidity, for centrality 10%-70%.

$v_1$ versus rapidity for charged particles.

$v_1$ versus rapidity for pions.

$v_1$ versus rapidity for protons.

Directed flow of charged particles as a function of pseudorapidity for the 60-70% and 70-80% centrality classes.

Directed flow of charged particles as a function of pseudorapidity for the 10-20%, 20-30%, 30-40%, 40-50% and 50-60% centrality classes.

Directed flow of charged particles as a function of pseudorapidity for the 5-10% centrality class.

Directed flow of charged particles as a function of pseudorapidity for the 0-5% centrality class.

$v_1${3} versus $p_t$ measured in the main TPC (|$\eta$| < 1.3), for centrality 10%-70%.

$v_1${3} versus $p_t$ measured in the Forward TPC (2.5 < |$\eta$| < 4.0), for different centralities.

Directed flow of charged particles as a function of impact parameter for the mid-pseudorapidity region (|$\eta$| < 1.3) and the forward pseudorapidity region (2.5 < |$\eta$| < 4.0.

Charged particle $v_1$ for Au+Au collisions (10%-70%) at 200 GeV as a function of $\eta-y_{beam}$.

Charged particle $v_1$ for Au+Au collisions (10%-70%) at 62.4 GeV as a function of $\eta-y_{beam}$.

Charged particle $v_1$ for Pb+Pb collisions (12.5%-33.5%) at 17.2 GeV as a function of $y-y_{beam}$.

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.9-1.1$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.05-3.15$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.15-3.25$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.4-3.6$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=-0.2-0.0$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.0-0.2$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.7-0.9$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.9-1.1$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.05-3.15$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.15-3.25$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.4-3.6$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=-0.15-0.15$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.6-0.8$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.8-1.0$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2.55-2.65$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2.65-2.75$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.15-3.25$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.25-3.35$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=-0.15-0.15$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.6-0.8$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.8-1.0$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2.55-2.65$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2.65-2.75$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.15-3.25$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=3.25-3.35$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\mathrm{\pi}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$,$\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{K}^{+}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$,$\mathrm{K}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}$ versus $y$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$,$\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\mathrm{K}^{+}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$,$\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{K}^{-}$,$\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\mathrm{K}^{+}/\mathrm{K}^{-}$ versus $\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$,$\mathrm{K}^{-}$,$\overline{\mathrm{p}}$,$\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\mathrm{K}^{+}/\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$,$\mathrm{K}^{-}/\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$ versus $\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$,$\mathrm{K}^{-}$,$\mathrm{\pi}^{+}$,$\mathrm{\pi}^{-}$,$\overline{\mathrm{p}}$,$\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$T_{\mathrm{K^{+}}}$,$T_{\mathrm{K^{-}}}$ versus $\overline{\mathrm{p}}/\mathrm{p}$ for $\mathrm{K}^{+}$,$\mathrm{K}^{-}$,$\mathrm{p}$,$\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

(Color online) Global polarization of $\Lambda$–hyperons as a function of centrality given as fraction of the total inelastic hadronic cross section. Filled circles show the results for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV (centrality region 20-70%) and open squares indicate the results for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=62.4 GeV (centrality region 0-80%). Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

(Color online) Global polarization of $\overline{\Lambda}$–hyperons as a function of $\overline{\Lambda}$ transverse momentum $p^{\overline{\Lambda}}_{t}$. Filled circles show the results for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV (centrality region 20-70%) and open squares indicate the results for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=62.4 GeV (centrality region 0-80%). Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

(Color online) Global polarization of $\overline{\Lambda}$–hyperons as a function of $\overline{\Lambda}$ pseudorapidity $\eta^{\overline{\Lambda}}$. Filled circles show the results for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV (centrality region 20-70%). A constant line fit to these data points yields $P_{\Lambda}=(1.8\pm 10.8)\times 10^{-3}$ with $\chi^{2}/ndf=5.5/10$. Open squares show the results for Au+Au collisions as $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=62.4 GeV (centrality region 0-80%). A constant line fit gives $P_{\Lambda}=(-17.6\pm 11.1)\times 10^{-3}$ with $\chi^{2}/ndf=8.0/10$. Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

(Color online) Global polarization of $\overline{\Lambda}$–hyperons as a function of as a function of centrality. Filled circles show the results for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV (centrality region 20-70%) and open squares indicate the result for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=62.4 GeV (centrality region 0-80%). Only statistical uncertainties are shown.

(Color online) Acceptance correction function $A_{0}(p^{H}_{t}, \eta^{H})$ defined in (10) as a function of $\Lambda$ (filled circles) and $\overline{\Lambda}$ (open squares) transverse momentum (top) and pseudorapidity (bottom). The deviation of this function from unity affects the overall scale of the measured global polarization according to Eq. 9. See the text for details and discussions on $A_{0}$ $p^{H}_{t}$ and $\eta^{H}$ dependence.

(Color online) Acceptance correction function $A_{0}(p^{H}_{t}, \eta^{H})$ defined in (10) as a function of $\Lambda$ (filled circles) and $\overline{\Lambda}$ (open squares) transverse momentum (top) and pseudorapidity (bottom). The deviation of this function from unity affects the overall scale of the measured global polarization according to Eq. 9. See the text for details and discussions on $A_{0}$ $p^{H}_{t}$ and $\eta^{H}$ dependence.

(Color online) Function $A_{2}(p^{H}_{t}, \eta^{H})$ defined in (11) as a function of $\Lambda$ (filled circles) and $\overline{\Lambda}$ (open squares) transverse momentum (top) and pseudorapidity (bottom). The deviation of this function from zero defines the contribution to the observable (3) from $P^{(2)}_{H} (p^{H}_{t}, \eta^{H})$ in the expansion (6).

(Color online) Function $A_{2}(p^{H}_{t}, \eta^{H})$ defined in (11) as a function of $\Lambda$ (filled circles) and $\overline{\Lambda}$ (open squares) transverse momentum (top) and pseudorapidity (bottom). The deviation of this function from zero defines the contribution to the observable (3) from $P^{(2)}_{H} (p^{H}_{t}, \eta^{H})$ in the expansion (6).

The elliptic flow $v_{2}$ of protons and anti-protons as a function of the transverse momentum, $p_{T}$, for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions. The lower panels show the difference in $v_{2}(p_{T})$ between the particles and anti-particles. The solid curves are fits with a horizontal line. The shaded areas depict the magnitude of the systematic errors.

The elliptic flow $v_{2}$ of protons and anti-protons as a function of the transverse momentum, $p_{T}$, for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions. The lower panels show the difference in $v_{2}(p_{T})$ between the particles and anti-particles. The solid curves are fits with a horizontal line. The shaded areas depict the magnitude of the systematic errors.

The elliptic flow $v_{2}$ of protons and anti-protons as a function of the transverse momentum, $p_{T}$, for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions. The lower panels show the difference in $v_{2}(p_{T})$ between the particles and anti-particles. The solid curves are fits with a horizontal line. The shaded areas depict the magnitude of the systematic errors.

The elliptic flow $v_{2}$ of protons and anti-protons as a function of the transverse momentum, $p_{T}$, for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions. The lower panels show the difference in $v_{2}(p_{T})$ between the particles and anti-particles. The solid curves are fits with a horizontal line. The shaded areas depict the magnitude of the systematic errors.

The elliptic flow $v_{2}$ of protons and anti-protons as a function of the transverse momentum, $p_{T}$, for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions. The lower panels show the difference in $v_{2}(p_{T})$ between the particles and anti-particles. The solid curves are fits with a horizontal line. The shaded areas depict the magnitude of the systematic errors.

The difference in $v_{2}$ between particles $(X)$ and their corresponding anti-particles $(X)$ (see legend) as a function of $\sqrt(s_{NN})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions. The dashed lines in the plot are fits with a power-law function. The error bars depict the combined statistical and systematic errors.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The upper panels depict the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of reduced transverse mass, $(m_{T} − m_{0})$, for particles, frames a) and b), and anti-particles, frames c) and d), in 0-80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV. Simultaneous fits to the mesons except the pions are shown as the dashed lines. The difference of the baryon $v_{2}$ and the meson fits are shown in the lower panels.

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

The number-of-constituent quark scaled elliptic flow $(v_{2}/n_{q})((m_{T} − m_{0})/n_{q})$ for 0–80$\%$ central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 and 62.4 GeV for selected particles, frames a) and b), and corresponding anti-particles, frames c) and d). The dashed lines are simultaneous fits [29] to all of the data sets at a given energy. The lower panels depict the ratios to the fits, while a $\pm10\%$ interval is shown as the shaded area to guide the eye. Some data points for $\varphi$ and $\Xi$ are out of the plot range in the lower panels of frames a) and c).

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

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

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

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

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

$\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ dependence of $<p_t>$ fluctuations for central collisions and STAR full acceptance. CERES fluctuation data (12.3 and 17.3 GeV) were linearly extrapolated to the STAR $\eta$ acceptance

Hijing-1.37 $<p_t>$ fluctuations for central collisions and the STAR acceptance at three energies, for quench-on, quench-off and jets-off collisions.

Charged particle $v_1(\eta)$ for 40-80 % centrality in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV.

Charged particle $v_1(p_t)$ in 200 GeV Au+Au for three centralities and two pseudorapidity ranges.

Charged particle $v_1(\eta)$ for mid-central (30-60%) Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV and 62.4 GeV.

Charged particle $v_1$ versus centrality for Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV and 62.4 GeV in two pseudorapidity ranges.

Charged particle $v_1$ versus $\eta-y_{beam}$, for 30 − 60% Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV.

Charged particle $v_1$ versus $\eta-y_{beam}$, for 30 − 60% Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV.

Charged particle $v_1$ versus $\eta-y_{beam}$, for 30 − 60% Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV.

Charged particle $v_1$ versus $\eta-y_{beam}$, for 30 − 60% Cu+Cu collisions at 62.4 GeV.

The $v_2$ as a function of $p_T$ for 20-30% central Au + Au collisions at midrapidity for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV, 11.5 GeV, 19.6 GeV, 27 GeV and 39 GeV.

$\varepsilon$ (Glauber) as a function of $p_T$ for various collision centralities (10-20%, 30-40% and 50-60%) in Au + Au collisions at midrapidity for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV, 11.5 GeV, 19.6 GeV, 27 GeV and 39 GeV.

$\varepsilon$ (CGC) as a function of $p_T$ for various collision centralities (10-20%, 30-40% and 50-60%) in Au + Au collisions at midrapidity for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV, 11.5 GeV, 19.6 GeV, 27 GeV and 39 GeV.

$v_2${EtaSubs} as a function of $p_T$ for various collision centralities (10-20%, 30-40% and 50-60%) in Au + Au collisions at midrapidity for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV, 11.5 GeV, 19.6 GeV, 27 GeV and 39 GeV.

The $v_2${EP} vs. $\eta$ for 10-40% centrality in Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV, 11.5 GeV, 19.6 GeV, 27 GeV and 39 GeV.

The $v_2${EP} vs. $\eta$ for 10-40% centrality in Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

The $v_2${4} vs. $p_T$ at midrapidity for various collision energies ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV, 11.5 GeV, 19.6 GeV, 27 GeV and 39 GeV).

The $v_2${4} vs. $p_T$ at midrapidity for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV.

The $v_2${4} vs. $p_T$ at midrapidity for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

FIG. 1. (Color online) Perspective views of $2 \mathrm{D}$ charge-independent angular correlations $\Delta \rho / \sqrt{\rho_{\mathrm{ref}}}$ on $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ for Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=200$ and $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ (top and bottom rows, respectively). Centrality increases left to right from most peripheral to most central. Corrected total cross-section fractions are (left to right) $84 \%-93 \%, 55 \%-64 \%, 18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $200-\mathrm{GeV}$ data and $84 \%-95 \%, 56 \%-65 \%$ $18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ data (see Tables III and IV).

FIG. 1. (Color online) Perspective views of $2 \mathrm{D}$ charge-independent angular correlations $\Delta \rho / \sqrt{\rho_{\mathrm{ref}}}$ on $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ for Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=200$ and $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ (top and bottom rows, respectively). Centrality increases left to right from most peripheral to most central. Corrected total cross-section fractions are (left to right) $84 \%-93 \%, 55 \%-64 \%, 18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $200-\mathrm{GeV}$ data and $84 \%-95 \%, 56 \%-65 \%$ $18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ data (see Tables III and IV).

FIG. 1. (Color online) Perspective views of $2 \mathrm{D}$ charge-independent angular correlations $\Delta \rho / \sqrt{\rho_{\mathrm{ref}}}$ on $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ for Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=200$ and $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ (top and bottom rows, respectively). Centrality increases left to right from most peripheral to most central. Corrected total cross-section fractions are (left to right) $84 \%-93 \%, 55 \%-64 \%, 18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $200-\mathrm{GeV}$ data and $84 \%-95 \%, 56 \%-65 \%$ $18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ data (see Tables III and IV).

FIG. 1. (Color online) Perspective views of $2 \mathrm{D}$ charge-independent angular correlations $\Delta \rho / \sqrt{\rho_{\mathrm{ref}}}$ on $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ for Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=200$ and $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ (top and bottom rows, respectively). Centrality increases left to right from most peripheral to most central. Corrected total cross-section fractions are (left to right) $84 \%-93 \%, 55 \%-64 \%, 18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $200-\mathrm{GeV}$ data and $84 \%-95 \%, 56 \%-65 \%$ $18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ data (see Tables III and IV).

FIG. 1. (Color online) Perspective views of $2 \mathrm{D}$ charge-independent angular correlations $\Delta \rho / \sqrt{\rho_{\mathrm{ref}}}$ on $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ for Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=200$ and $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ (top and bottom rows, respectively). Centrality increases left to right from most peripheral to most central. Corrected total cross-section fractions are (left to right) $84 \%-93 \%, 55 \%-64 \%, 18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $200-\mathrm{GeV}$ data and $84 \%-95 \%, 56 \%-65 \%$ $18 \%-28 \%,$ and $0 \%-5 \%$ for the $62 \mathrm{GeV}$ data (see Tables III and IV).

FIG. 2. (Color online) Fit decomposition of the $46 \%-56 \%$ centrality data for 62 -GeV Au-Au collisions. The top panels show from left to right the corrected data, model fit, fit residuals (data - model), and same-side 2D Gaussian. The bottom panels similarly show the away-side azimuth dipole, the nonjet azimuth quadrupole, the 1D $\eta_{\Delta}$ Gaussian, and the 2D exponential. This centrality is just below the sharp transition at $v_{\text {trans }}=3$. Fit residuals (c) are scaled up eightfold relative to the data.

FIG. 3. Fit parameters for $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ correlation data from Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=62$ (open symbols) and 200 GeV (solid symbols) versus centrality measure $\nu$ computed at fixed energy $(200 \mathrm{GeV})$. The SS $2 \mathrm{D}$ Gaussian amplitudes, $\eta_{\Delta}$ widths, and $\phi_{\Delta}$ widths are shown in the left, center, and right panels, respectively of the top row. The bottom row shows from left to right the amplitudes for the dipole, quadrupole, and SS peak width aspect ratio $\sigma_{\eta_{\Delta}} / \sigma_{\phi_{\Delta}} .$ Fitting errors are indicated by error bars where larger than the symbols. Solid lines connect the points for clarity. The dotted and dashed curves indicate Glauber linear superposition estimates for 62 - and 200 -GeV peak amplitudes respectively, as discussed in the text. The quadrupole data are consistent with Ref. [60]. The hatched regions indicate the full range of systematic uncertainties listed in Appendix F. The vertical dark bands indicate estimated $v$ equivalents for $N-N$ collisions and $b=0$ Au-Au collisions.

FIG. 3. Fit parameters for $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ correlation data from Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=62$ (open symbols) and 200 GeV (solid symbols) versus centrality measure $\nu$ computed at fixed energy $(200 \mathrm{GeV})$. The SS $2 \mathrm{D}$ Gaussian amplitudes, $\eta_{\Delta}$ widths, and $\phi_{\Delta}$ widths are shown in the left, center, and right panels, respectively of the top row. The bottom row shows from left to right the amplitudes for the dipole, quadrupole, and SS peak width aspect ratio $\sigma_{\eta_{\Delta}} / \sigma_{\phi_{\Delta}} .$ Fitting errors are indicated by error bars where larger than the symbols. Solid lines connect the points for clarity. The dotted and dashed curves indicate Glauber linear superposition estimates for 62 - and 200 -GeV peak amplitudes respectively, as discussed in the text. The quadrupole data are consistent with Ref. [60]. The hatched regions indicate the full range of systematic uncertainties listed in Appendix F. The vertical dark bands indicate estimated $v$ equivalents for $N-N$ collisions and $b=0$ Au-Au collisions.

FIG. 3. Fit parameters for $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ correlation data from Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=62$ (open symbols) and 200 GeV (solid symbols) versus centrality measure $\nu$ computed at fixed energy $(200 \mathrm{GeV})$. The SS $2 \mathrm{D}$ Gaussian amplitudes, $\eta_{\Delta}$ widths, and $\phi_{\Delta}$ widths are shown in the left, center, and right panels, respectively of the top row. The bottom row shows from left to right the amplitudes for the dipole, quadrupole, and SS peak width aspect ratio $\sigma_{\eta_{\Delta}} / \sigma_{\phi_{\Delta}} .$ Fitting errors are indicated by error bars where larger than the symbols. Solid lines connect the points for clarity. The dotted and dashed curves indicate Glauber linear superposition estimates for 62 - and 200 -GeV peak amplitudes respectively, as discussed in the text. The quadrupole data are consistent with Ref. [60]. The hatched regions indicate the full range of systematic uncertainties listed in Appendix F. The vertical dark bands indicate estimated $v$ equivalents for $N-N$ collisions and $b=0$ Au-Au collisions.

FIG. 3. Fit parameters for $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ correlation data from Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=62$ (open symbols) and 200 GeV (solid symbols) versus centrality measure $\nu$ computed at fixed energy $(200 \mathrm{GeV})$. The SS $2 \mathrm{D}$ Gaussian amplitudes, $\eta_{\Delta}$ widths, and $\phi_{\Delta}$ widths are shown in the left, center, and right panels, respectively of the top row. The bottom row shows from left to right the amplitudes for the dipole, quadrupole, and SS peak width aspect ratio $\sigma_{\eta_{\Delta}} / \sigma_{\phi_{\Delta}} .$ Fitting errors are indicated by error bars where larger than the symbols. Solid lines connect the points for clarity. The dotted and dashed curves indicate Glauber linear superposition estimates for 62 - and 200 -GeV peak amplitudes respectively, as discussed in the text. The quadrupole data are consistent with Ref. [60]. The hatched regions indicate the full range of systematic uncertainties listed in Appendix F. The vertical dark bands indicate estimated $v$ equivalents for $N-N$ collisions and $b=0$ Au-Au collisions.

FIG. 3. Fit parameters for $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ correlation data from Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=62$ (open symbols) and 200 GeV (solid symbols) versus centrality measure $\nu$ computed at fixed energy $(200 \mathrm{GeV})$. The SS $2 \mathrm{D}$ Gaussian amplitudes, $\eta_{\Delta}$ widths, and $\phi_{\Delta}$ widths are shown in the left, center, and right panels, respectively of the top row. The bottom row shows from left to right the amplitudes for the dipole, quadrupole, and SS peak width aspect ratio $\sigma_{\eta_{\Delta}} / \sigma_{\phi_{\Delta}} .$ Fitting errors are indicated by error bars where larger than the symbols. Solid lines connect the points for clarity. The dotted and dashed curves indicate Glauber linear superposition estimates for 62 - and 200 -GeV peak amplitudes respectively, as discussed in the text. The quadrupole data are consistent with Ref. [60]. The hatched regions indicate the full range of systematic uncertainties listed in Appendix F. The vertical dark bands indicate estimated $v$ equivalents for $N-N$ collisions and $b=0$ Au-Au collisions.

FIG. 3. Fit parameters for $\left(\eta_{\Delta}, \phi_{\Delta}\right)$ correlation data from Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{N N}}=62$ (open symbols) and 200 GeV (solid symbols) versus centrality measure $\nu$ computed at fixed energy $(200 \mathrm{GeV})$. The SS $2 \mathrm{D}$ Gaussian amplitudes, $\eta_{\Delta}$ widths, and $\phi_{\Delta}$ widths are shown in the left, center, and right panels, respectively of the top row. The bottom row shows from left to right the amplitudes for the dipole, quadrupole, and SS peak width aspect ratio $\sigma_{\eta_{\Delta}} / \sigma_{\phi_{\Delta}} .$ Fitting errors are indicated by error bars where larger than the symbols. Solid lines connect the points for clarity. The dotted and dashed curves indicate Glauber linear superposition estimates for 62 - and 200 -GeV peak amplitudes respectively, as discussed in the text. The quadrupole data are consistent with Ref. [60]. The hatched regions indicate the full range of systematic uncertainties listed in Appendix F. The vertical dark bands indicate estimated $v$ equivalents for $N-N$ collisions and $b=0$ Au-Au collisions.

FIG. 4. (Color online) (a) 2D data histogram from $0 \%-5 \%$ central 200 GeV Au-Au collisions $[(0,0)$ bin suppressed]. (b) Additional model component fitted to the $2 \mathrm{D}$ histogram and consisting of an AS azimuth dipole modulated by function $F\left(\eta_{\Delta}\right)$ described in the text. (c) Fit residuals including the new model component. (d) Data histogram in the first panel minus the additional model component and fitted offset. Remaining structure is described accurately by an AS dipole and SS 2D Gaussian.

FIG. 9. (a) Amplitude of SS 2D peak (jet-correlated pairs per final-state hadron) for data (solid points), GLS extrapolation from $p$ - $p$ data (dashed curve) and from the HIJING Monte Carlo (open points, dotted curve). (b) Single-particle production extrapolated from $p-p$ data (dashed curve, GLS), and from more-central Au-Au data (solid line) and HIJING (dash-dotted line, open points). (c) Single-particle hard-component production per $N-N$ binary collision from $p-p$ data, from more-central Au-Au data and from HIJING (open points). (d) Jet-correlated pair production (SS 2D peak) per $N-N$ binary collision extrapolated from $p-p$ data (GLS), and from Au-Au data (solid points) and HIJING (open points).

FIG. 9. (a) Amplitude of SS 2D peak (jet-correlated pairs per final-state hadron) for data (solid points), GLS extrapolation from $p$ - $p$ data (dashed curve) and from the HIJING Monte Carlo (open points, dotted curve). (b) Single-particle production extrapolated from $p-p$ data (dashed curve, GLS), and from more-central Au-Au data (solid line) and HIJING (dash-dotted line, open points). (c) Single-particle hard-component production per $N-N$ binary collision from $p-p$ data, from more-central Au-Au data and from HIJING (open points). (d) Jet-correlated pair production (SS 2D peak) per $N-N$ binary collision extrapolated from $p-p$ data (GLS), and from Au-Au data (solid points) and HIJING (open points).

FIG. 9. (a) Amplitude of SS 2D peak (jet-correlated pairs per final-state hadron) for data (solid points), GLS extrapolation from $p$ - $p$ data (dashed curve) and from the HIJING Monte Carlo (open points, dotted curve). (b) Single-particle production extrapolated from $p-p$ data (dashed curve, GLS), and from more-central Au-Au data (solid line) and HIJING (dash-dotted line, open points). (c) Single-particle hard-component production per $N-N$ binary collision from $p-p$ data, from more-central Au-Au data and from HIJING (open points). (d) Jet-correlated pair production (SS 2D peak) per $N-N$ binary collision extrapolated from $p-p$ data (GLS), and from Au-Au data (solid points) and HIJING (open points).

FIG. 9. (a) Amplitude of SS 2D peak (jet-correlated pairs per final-state hadron) for data (solid points), GLS extrapolation from $p$ - $p$ data (dashed curve) and from the HIJING Monte Carlo (open points, dotted curve). (b) Single-particle production extrapolated from $p-p$ data (dashed curve, GLS), and from more-central Au-Au data (solid line) and HIJING (dash-dotted line, open points). (c) Single-particle hard-component production per $N-N$ binary collision from $p-p$ data, from more-central Au-Au data and from HIJING (open points). (d) Jet-correlated pair production (SS 2D peak) per $N-N$ binary collision extrapolated from $p-p$ data (GLS), and from Au-Au data (solid points) and HIJING (open points).

FIG. 11. (Color online) (Left) Uncorrected angular correlations from 62-GeV $37 \%-46 \%$ central Au-Au collisions showing pileup distortions, especially evident as the W-shaped nonuniformity of the AS ridge on $\eta_{\Delta}$. (Right) The same data with pileup correction applied.

(a) Centrality dependence of $v^{even}_{1}$ for $0.4 \lt p_{T} \lt 0.7$ GeV/c for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}} = 200, 39$ and $19.6$ GeV; (b) $K$ vs. $\langle N_{ch} \rangle^{-1}$ for the $v^{even}_{1}$ values shown in (a). The $\langle N_{ch} \rangle$ values correspond to the centrality intervals indicated in panel (a).

Comparison of the $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}$ dependence of $v^{even}_{1}$ and $v_3$ for $0.4 \lt p_{T} \lt 0.7$ GeV/c in 0-10 central Au+Au collisions.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(Color online) Dynamical net charge fluctuations, $\nu_{+−,dyn}$, of particles produced with pseudorapidity $|\eta|$ < 0.5 scaled by (a) the multiplicity, $dN_{ch}/d\eta$. The dashed line corresponds to charge conservation effect and the solid line to the prediction for a resonance gas, (b) the number of participants, and (c) the number of binary collisions.

(Color online) Dynamical net charge fluctuations, $\nu_{+−,dyn}$, of particles produced with pseudorapidity $|\eta|$ < 0.5 scaled by (a) the multiplicity, $dN_{ch}/d\eta$. The dashed line corresponds to charge conservation effect and the solid line to the prediction for a resonance gas, (b) the number of participants, and (c) the number of binary collisions.

(Color online) Dynamical fluctuations $\nu_{+−,dyn}$, normalized to their value for |$\eta$| < 1, as function of the integrated pseudorapidity range. (a) data for $Au + Au$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4, 200 GeV (0-5%) along with data for $Cu + Cu$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4, 200 GeV (0-10%), are compared to inclusive $p + p$ data at $\sqrt{s}$ = 200 GeV, and (b) data for $Au + Au$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4, 200 GeV (30-40%) along with data for $Cu + Cu$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4, 200 GeV (0-10%), are compared to inclusive $p + p$ collision data at $\sqrt{}s$ = 200 GeV.

(Color online) Dynamical fluctuations $\nu_{+−,dyn}$, normalized to their value for |$\eta$| < 1, as function of the integrated pseudorapidity range. (a) data for $Au + Au$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4, 200 GeV (0-5%) along with data for $Cu + Cu$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4, 200 GeV (0-10%), are compared to inclusive $p + p$ data at $\sqrt{s}$ = 200 GeV, and (b) data for $Au + Au$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4, 200 GeV (30-40%) along with data for $Cu + Cu$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4, 200 GeV (0-10%), are compared to inclusive $p + p$ collision data at $\sqrt{}s$ = 200 GeV.

(Color online) Dynamical fluctuations $\nu_{+−,dyn}$, as a function of the integrated azimuthal range $\phi$ for selected collision centralities for (a) $Au + Au$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, and (b) $Cu + Cu$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

(Color online) Dynamical fluctuations $\nu_{+−,dyn}$, as a function of the integrated azimuthal range $\phi$ for selected collision centralities for (a) $Au + Au$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, and (b) $Cu + Cu$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

(Color online) Dynamical fluctuations $\nu_{+−,dyn}$, as a function of the integrated azimuthal range $\phi$ for similar number of participating nucleons for $Au + Au$ and $Cu + Cu$ $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

$\rho^0$ production cross section determined with the data set collected with trigger B, as a function of momentum transfer $t$, fitted with a double exponential fit function in the range $t < 0.1$. The statistical errors are shown. The ratio of incoherent to coherent cross sections is measured to be $0.20 \pm 0.8$. The fit parameters are shown in Table I.

Comparison of theoretical predictions to the measured total cross section for coherent $\rho^0$ production as a functionof $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ . The measured cross section is based on the dataset collected with trigger B. The error bars show the sum of the statistical and systematic uncertainties. See text for details.

Centrality and pT dependence of RCP for pions and protons for Au+Au at sqrt(sNN) = 62.4 GeV. For studying the energy dependence, the corresponding RCP for central 0-12% Au+Au at sqrt(sNN) = 200 GeV are shown. RAA for pions at 62.4 GeV (0-10%) and 200 GeV (0-12%) are also shown.

The proton (anti-proton) over pion ratios versus pT at sqrt(sNN) = 62.4 and 200 GeV for central and peripheral collisions.

Identified particle (Kaon Plus) RCP for RHIC BES energies. The colored shaded boxes describe the point-to-point systematic uncertainties. The uncertainty bands at unity on the right side of the plot correspond to the pT -independent uncertainty in Ncoll scaling with the color in the band corresponding to the color of the data points for that energy.

Identified particle (Kaon Minus) RCP for RHIC BES energies. The colored shaded boxes describe the point-to-point systematic uncertainties. The uncertainty bands at unity on the right side of the plot correspond to the pT -independent uncertainty in Ncoll scaling with the color in the band corresponding to the color of the data points for that energy.

Identified particle (Proton) RCP for RHIC BES energies. The colored shaded boxes describe the point-to-point systematic uncertainties. The uncertainty bands at unity on the right side of the plot correspond to the pT -independent uncertainty in Ncoll scaling with the color in the band corresponding to the color of the data points for that energy.

Identified particle (Antiproton) RCP for RHIC BES energies. The colored shaded boxes describe the point-to-point systematic uncertainties. The uncertainty bands at unity on the right side of the plot correspond to the pT -independent uncertainty in Ncoll scaling with the color in the band corresponding to the color of the data points for that energy.

Charged hadron Y(<Npart>) for two ranges of pT (pT 3.0 - 3.5 GeV/c). Statistical uncertainty bars are included, mostly smaller than point size, as well as shaded bands to indicate systematic uncertainties.

Charged hadron Y(<Npart>) for two ranges of pT (pT 4.0 - 4.5 GeV/c). Statistical uncertainty bars are included, mostly smaller than point size, as well as shaded bands to indicate systematic uncertainties.

Glauber Fit Parameters

Nch at each Collision Energy (GeV)

Ncoll at each Collision Energy (GeV)

Npart at each Collision Energy (GeV)

The value of $\sigma^{NN}_{inel}$ used in the Monte Carlo Glauber simulation at each collision energy

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

The balance function in terms of $\Delta \eta$ for all charged particles with $0.2 < p_{T} < 2.0$ GeV/$c$ from central Au+Au collisions (0-5%) for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=27$ GeV. The data are the measured balance functions corrected by subtracting balance functions calculated using mixed events. Also shown are balance functions calculated using shuffled events.

The balance function in terms of $\Delta \eta$ for all charged particles with $0.2 < p_{T} < 2.0$ GeV/$c$ from central Au+Au collisions (0-5%) for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=39$ GeV. The data are the measured balance functions corrected by subtracting balance functions calculated using mixed events. Also shown are balance functions calculated using shuffled events.

The balance function in terms of $\Delta \eta$ for all charged particles with $0.2 < p_{T} < 2.0$ GeV/$c$ from central Au+Au collisions (0-5%) for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=62.4$ GeV. The data are the measured balance functions corrected by subtracting balance functions calculated using mixed events. Also shown are balance functions calculated using shuffled events.

The balance function in terms of $\Delta \eta$ for all charged particles with $0.2 < p_{T} < 2.0$ GeV/$c$ from central Au+Au collisions (0-5%) for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=200$ GeV. The data are the measured balance functions corrected by subtracting balance functions calculated using mixed events. Also shown are balance functions calculated using shuffled events.

Energy dependence of the balance function widths compared with the widths of the balance functions calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are the balance function widths calculated using UrQMD. The dashed line represents the width of the balance function calculated using shuffled events for a constant $dN/d\eta$ distribution. Error bars represent the statistical error and the shaded bands represent the systematic error.

Energy dependence of the balance function widths compared with the widths of the balance functions calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are the balance function widths calculated using UrQMD. The dashed line represents the width of the balance function calculated using shuffled events for a constant $dN/d\eta$ distribution. Error bars represent the statistical error and the shaded bands represent the systematic error.

Energy dependence of the balance function widths compared with the widths of the balance functions calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are the balance function widths calculated using UrQMD. The dashed line represents the width of the balance function calculated using shuffled events for a constant $dN/d\eta$ distribution. Error bars represent the statistical error and the shaded bands represent the systematic error.

Energy dependence of the balance function widths compared with the widths of the balance functions calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are the balance function widths calculated using UrQMD. The dashed line represents the width of the balance function calculated using shuffled events for a constant $dN/d\eta$ distribution. Error bars represent the statistical error and the shaded bands represent the systematic error.

Energy dependence of the balance function widths compared with the widths of the balance functions calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are the balance function widths calculated using UrQMD. The dashed line represents the width of the balance function calculated using shuffled events for a constant $dN/d\eta$ distribution. Error bars represent the statistical error and the shaded bands represent the systematic error.

Energy dependence of the balance function widths compared with the widths of the balance functions calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are the balance function widths calculated using UrQMD. The dashed line represents the width of the balance function calculated using shuffled events for a constant $dN/d\eta$ distribution. Error bars represent the statistical error and the shaded bands represent the systematic error.

Energy dependence of the balance function widths compared with the widths of the balance functions calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are the balance function widths calculated using UrQMD. The dashed line represents the width of the balance function calculated using shuffled events for a constant $dN/d\eta$ distribution. Error bars represent the statistical error and the shaded bands represent the systematic error.

Balance function widths for the most central events ($0-5\%$) compared with balance function widths calculated using shuffled events. Also shown are balance function widths calculated using UrQMD and shuffled UrQMD events. The dashed line represents the width of the balance function calculated using shuffled events for a constant $dN/d\eta$ distribution.

Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.

Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.

Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.

Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.

Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.

Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.

Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.

Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.

Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ normalized to the most peripheral centrality bin compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.

Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ normalized to the most peripheral centrality bin compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.

Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ normalized to the most peripheral centrality bin compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.

Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ normalized to the most peripheral centrality bin compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.

Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ normalized to the most peripheral centrality bin compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.

Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ normalized to the most peripheral centrality bin compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.

Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ normalized to the most peripheral centrality bin compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.

Acceptance-corrected balance function widths for Au+Au measured over the range $0.1 < \Delta \eta < 1.6$ normalized to the most peripheral centrality bin compared with similar results from Pb+Pb collisions from ALICE. Only statistical errors are shown. Lines represent fits of the form $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.

Confidence limits on associated yield with thrust coordinates as a function of avg N_trk^corr.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy v2 as a function of pT in 50-60% Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV using FTPC flow vectors, and that with subtracting the azimuthal correlations in p+p collisions.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy v2 as a function of pT in 40-50% Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV using FTPC flow vectors, and that with subtracting the azimuthal correlations in p+p collisions.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy v2 as a function of pT in 30-40% Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV using FTPC flow vectors, and that with subtracting the azimuthal correlations in p+p collisions.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy v2 as a function of pT in 20-30% Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV using FTPC flow vectors, and that with subtracting the azimuthal correlations in p+p collisions.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy v2 as a function of pT in 10-20% Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV using FTPC flow vectors, and that with subtracting the azimuthal correlations in p+p collisions.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy v2 as a function of pT in 0-10% Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV using FTPC flow vectors, and that with subtracting the azimuthal correlations in p+p collisions.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy v2 integrated over pT and eta vs centrality in Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV for the various methods.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy v2 integrated over pT and eta vs centrality in Cu+Cu collisions at 62.4 GeV for the various methods.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy v2 as a function of pT in 50-60% Cu+Cu collisions at 62.4 GeV. Data tables for 200 GeV are shown in Fig.4.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy v2 as a function of pT in 40-50% Cu+Cu collisions at 62.4 GeV using FTPC flow vectors. Data tables for 200 GeV are shown in Fig.4.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy v2 as a function of pT in 30-40% Cu+Cu collisions at 62.4 GeV using FTPC flow vectors. Data tables for 200 GeV are shown in Fig.4.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy v2 as a function of pT in 20-30% Cu+Cu collisions at 62.4 GeV using FTPC flow vectors. Data tables for 200 GeV are shown in Fig.4.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy v2 as a function of pT in 10-20% Cu+Cu collisions at 62.4 GeV using FTPC flow vectors. Data tables for 200 GeV are shown in Fig.4.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy v2 as a function of pT in 0-10% Cu+Cu collisions at 62.4 GeV using FTPC flow vectors. Data tables for 200 GeV are shown in Fig.4.

Charged hadron azimuthal anisotropy v2 as a function of pT in 0-60% Cu+Cu collisions at 62.4 GeV using FTPC flow vectors. Data tables for 200 GeV are shown in Fig.3.

K0S azimuthal anisotropy v2 vs pT in 0-60% central Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV.

K0S azimuthal anisotropy v2 vs pT in 0-20% central Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV.

K0S azimuthal anisotropy v2 vs pT in 20-60% central Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV.

Lambda azimuthal anisotropy v2 vs pT in 0-60% central Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV.

Lambda azimuthal anisotropy v2 vs pT in 0-20% central Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV.

Lambda azimuthal anisotropy v2 vs pT in 20-60% central Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV.

Xi azimuthal anisotropy v2 vs pT in 0-60% central Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV.

phi azimuthal anisotropy v2 vs pT in 0-60% central Cu+Cu collisions at 200 GeV.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

(a) The corrected integrated yield $dN/dy$ at mid-rapidity for $\overline{\Xi}^{+}$ , $\overline{\Lambda}$ and $\overline{p}$ divided by $N_{part}$, normalized to the most peripheral centrality interval (60 − 80%), plotted as a function of $N_{part}$. The gray, black and dashed bands represent the errors on the normalization to the most peripheral bin for the $\overline{\Xi}^{+}$, $\overline{\Lambda}$ and $\overline{p}$. Other errors shown are statistical only. (b) $\gamma_{s}$ as a function of $N_{part}$ calculated from thermal model fits to the measured particle yields ($\pi$,K,p [24], $\Lambda$, $\Xi$, $\Omega$ and their anti-particles) at 200 GeV. Values for $e^{+}+e^{−}$ and $p+\overline{p}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 91 and 200 GeV respectively and for Pb+Pb SPS collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 17.2 GeV are shown for comparison [26, 27, 28].

(a) The corrected integrated yield $dN/dy$ at mid-rapidity for $\overline{\Xi}^{+}$ , $\overline{\Lambda}$ and $\overline{p}$ divided by $N_{part}$, normalized to the most peripheral centrality interval (60 − 80%), plotted as a function of $N_{part}$. The gray, black and dashed bands represent the errors on the normalization to the most peripheral bin for the $\overline{\Xi}^{+}$, $\overline{\Lambda}$ and $\overline{p}$. Other errors shown are statistical only. (b) $\gamma_{s}$ as a function of $N_{part}$ calculated from thermal model fits to the measured particle yields ($\pi$,K,p [24], $\Lambda$, $\Xi$, $\Omega$ and their anti-particles) at 200 GeV. Values for $e^{+}+e^{−}$ and $p+\overline{p}$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 91 and 200 GeV respectively and for Pb+Pb SPS collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 17.2 GeV are shown for comparison [26, 27, 28].

$R_{CP}$ for $\Xi^{-}+\overline{\Xi}^{+}$ and $\Omega^{-}+\overline{\Omega}^{+}$ at mid-rapidity (centrality interval : 0 − 5% vs. 40 − 60%). A dashed line for charged hadrons and gray band for $\Lambda^{-}+\overline{\Lambda}$ are shown as comparison. The gray rectangles represent participant and binary scalings.

(Color Online) Variation of $N_{ch}$ normalized to the number of collisions in the FTPC coverage $(2.9 \leq \eta \leq 3.9)$ and $N_{\gamma}$ normalized to number of collisions, in the PMD coverage $(2.3 \leq \eta \leq 3.7)$ as a function of $N_{coll}$. The lower band shows the uncertainty in the ratio due to uncertainties in $N_{coll}$ calculations.

(Color Online) $dN/d\eta$ for charged particles and photons for Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV for various event centrality classes.

(Color Online) $dN/d\eta$ for charged particles and photons for Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV for various event centrality classes.

(Color Online) Half width at half maximum of the pseudorapidity distributions ($\eta_{h}$) of charged particles as a function of total charged particle multiplicity ($N_{T}$) normalized to the center of mass energy. The Au + Au collision data are from the PHOBOS [8] experiment and p + p collision data are from the ISR [31] experiments.

(Color Online) Half width at half maximum of the pseudorapidity distributions ($\eta_{h}$) of charged particles as a function of total charged particle multiplicity ($N_{T}$) normalized to the center of mass energy. The Au + Au collision data are from the PHOBOS [8] experiment and p + p collision data are from the ISR [31] experiments.

(Color Online) Variation of $dN_{ch}/d\eta$ normalized to $N_{part}$ with $\eta – y_{beam}$ for central and peripheral collisions for positively charged hadrons ($h^{+}$) and negatively charged hadrons ($h^{−}$).

(Color Online) The top panel shows the variation of pion rapidity density normalized to $N_{part}$ with $y – y_{beam}$ for central collisions at various collision energies. Also shown is the estimated $dN_{\pi^{0}}/dy$ obtained from $dN\_{\gamma}/dy$ normalized to $N_{part}$. The bottom panel shows the variation of net proton rapidity density normalized to $N_{part}$ with $y – y_{beam}$ for central collisions at various collision energies.

(Color Online) The top panel shows the variation of pion rapidity density normalized to $N_{part}$ with $y – y_{beam}$ for central collisions at various collision energies. Also shown is the estimated $dN_{\pi^{0}}/dy$ obtained from $dN\_{\gamma}/dy$ normalized to $N_{part}$. The bottom panel shows the variation of net proton rapidity density normalized to $N_{part}$ with $y – y_{beam}$ for central collisions at various collision energies.

Numerical values of double-differential yields $d^{2}n/dydp_{T}$ presented in Fig. 10, given in units of $10^{−3} (GeV/c)^{−1}$. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic

Numerical values of double-differential yields $1/m_T d^{2}n/dm_{T}dy$ given in units of $10^{−3}(GeV)^{−2}$ and presented in Fig. 11; the values of $m_T−m_0$ specify the bin centers. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic

Numerical values of double-differential yields $1/m_T d^{2}n/dm_{T}dy$ given in units of $10^{−3}(GeV)^{−2}$ and presented in Fig. 11; the values of $m_T−m_0$ specify the bin centers. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic

Numerical values of double-differential yields $1/m_T d^{2}n/dm_{T}dy$ given in units of $10^{−3}(GeV)^{−2}$ and presented in Fig. 11; the values of $m_T−m_0$ specify the bin centers. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic

Numerical values of the $p_T$-integrated and extrapolated $dn/dy$ distribution presented in Fig. 12. The first uncertainty is statistical, while the second one is systematic. Additionally, the width of the Gaussian fit to the $dn/dy$ distribution, as well as the mean multiplicity of $K^{*}(892)^0$ mesons are shown (see the text for details)

The mean multiplicities $\langle K^{*}(892)^0\rangle$ and the widths of the rapidity distributions $\sigma_y$ obtained from $dn/dy$ distributions (see the text for details). The first uncertainty is statistical and the second systematic

The mean multiplicity of $K^{*}(892)^0$ mesons for 158 GeV/$c$ inelastic p+p interactions compared to theoretical multiplicities obtained within Hadron Gas Models

The mean multiplicities of different particle species measured in nucleus-nucleus collisions at 158$A$ GeV/$c$ by NA49 and NA61/SHINE. The total uncertainties of $\langle K^{*}(892)^0\rangle$, $\langle K^{+}\rangle$ and $\langle K^{-}\rangle$ were taken as the square roots of the sums of squares of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For NA49 p+p data, the $\langle K^{+}\rangle$ and $\langle K^{-}\rangle$ results include statistical uncertainties only($\langle K^{+}\rangle$ =0.2267$\pm$0.0006 and $\langle K^{-}\rangle$=0.1303$\pm$0.0004), whereas systematic uncertainties for total yields were not reported. Therefore, NA61/SHINE $\langle K^{+}\rangle$ and $\langle K^{-}\rangle$ values were used in the $\langle K^{*}(892)^0 \rangle / \langle K^{+} \rangle$ and $\langle K^{*}(892)^{0}\rangle / \langle K^{-} \rangle$ ratios. The numbers of $\langle K^{+} \rangle$ and $\langle K^{−}\rangle$ and their uncertainties for the 5% most central Pb+Pb collisions were multiplied by a factor 262/362 in orderto estimate charged kaon multiplicities in the 23.5% most central Pb+Pb reactions

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.

Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.

Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.

Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.

Raw $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV for 0–5%, 30–40%, and 70–80% collision centralities at midrapidity. The distributions are not corrected for the finite centrality bin width effect nor the reconstruction efficiency.

Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of cumulants (C1, C2, C3, and C4) of $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collision centrality dependence of the $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collisions energy dependence of $M/\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ multiplicity distributions from 0–5% most central and 70–80% peripheral collisions in Au+Au collisions at \sqrt{s_{NN}} = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collisions energy dependence of $S\sigma$ for $\Delta N_k$ multiplicity distributions from 0–5% most central and 70–80% peripheral collisions in Au+Au collisions at \sqrt{s_{NN}} = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

Collisions energy dependence of $\kappa\sigma^2$ for $\Delta N_k$ multiplicity distributions from 0–5% most central and 70–80% peripheral collisions in Au+Au collisions at \sqrt{s_{NN}} = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The error bars are statistical uncertainties and the caps represent systematic uncertainties.

$\langle cos(\phi_{\alpha}+\phi_{\beta}−2\phi_{c})\rangle$ as a function of reference multiplicity for different charge combinations, after corrections for acceptance effects. In the legend the signs indicate the charge of particles $\alpha$, $\beta$, and c. The results shown are for Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV obtained in the Full Field.

$\langle cos(\phi_{\alpha}-\phi_{\beta})\rangle$ as a function of centrality for different charge combinations and FF and RFF configurations. The data points corresponding to different charge and field configurations are slightly shifted in the horizontal direction with respect to each other for clarity. The error bars are statistical. Also shown are model predictions described in Section VII.

A comparison of the correlations obtained by selecting the third particle from the main TPC or from the Forward TPCs. The TPC and FTPC points are shifted horizontally relative to one another for clarity purposes. The error bars are statistical.

A comparison of the correlations obtained by selecting the third particle from the main TPC or from the Forward TPCs after scaling by the flow of the third particle. The shaded areas represent the uncertainty from $v_{2,c}$ scaling (see text for details). The TPC and FTPC points are shifted horizontally relative to one another for clarity purposes. The error bars are statistical.

$\langle cos(\phi_{\alpha}+\phi_{\beta}−2\Psi_{RP})\rangle$ in Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV calculated using Eq. 7. The error-bars show the statistical errors. The shaded area reflects the uncertainty in the elliptic flow values used in calculations, with lower (in magnitude) limit obtained with elliptic flow from two-particle correlations and upper limit from four-particle cumulants. For details, see Section IV. Thick solid (Au+Au) and dashed (Cu+Cu) lines represent possible non-reaction-plane dependent contribution from many-particle clusters as estimated by HIJING, see Section VII A.

$\langle cos(\phi_{\alpha}+\phi_{\beta}−2\Psi_{RP})\rangle$ in Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62 GeV calculated using Eq. 7. The error-bars show the statistical errors. The shaded area reflects the uncertainty in the elliptic flow values used in calculations. For details, see Section IV. Thick solid (Au+Au) and dashed (Cu+Cu) lines represent possible non-reaction-plane dependent contribution from many-particle clusters as estimated by HIJING, see Section VII A.

Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. The correlations are scaled with the number of participants and are plotted as function of centrality. The error-bars indicate the statistical errors. The shaded area reflects the uncertainty in the elliptic flow values used in calculations. For details, see Section IV. Thick solid (Au+Au) and dashed (Cu+Cu) lines represent possible non-reaction-plane dependent contribution from many-particle clusters as estimated by HIJING, see Section VII A.

Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV. The correlations are scaled with the number of participants and are plotted as function of number of participants. The error-bars indicate the statistical errors. The shaded area reflects the uncertainty in the elliptic flow values used in calculations. For details, see Section IV. Thick solid (Au+Au) and dashed (Cu+Cu) lines represent possible non-reaction-plane dependent contribution from many-particle clusters as estimated by HIJING, see Section VII A.

Au+Au at 200 GeV. The correlations dependence on pseudorapidity separation $\Delta\eta$ = |$\eta_{\alpha}$ − $\eta_{\beta}$| for centrality 30-50%. The shaded band indicates uncertainty associated with $v_{2}$ measurements and has been calculated using two- and four-particle cumulant results as the limits.

Au+Au at 200 GeV. The correlations dependence on pseudorapidity separation $\Delta\eta$ = |$\eta_{\alpha}$ − $\eta_{\beta}$| for centrality 10-30%. The shaded band indicates uncertainty associated with $v_{2}$ measurements and has been calculated using two- and four-particle cumulant results as the limits.

Au+Au at 200 GeV. The correlations dependence on (p$_{t,\alpha}$ + p$_{t,\beta}$)/2 for centrality 30-50%. The shaded band indicates uncertainty associated with $v_{2}$ measurements and has been calculated using two- and four-particle cumulant results as the limits.

Au+Au at 200 GeV. The correlations dependence on (p$_{t,\alpha}$ + p$_{t,\beta}$)/2 for centrality 10-30%. The shaded band indicates uncertainty associated with $v_{2}$ measurements and has been calculated using two- and four-particle cumulant results as the limits.

Au+Au at 200 GeV. The correlations dependence on |p$_{t,\alpha}$ - p$_{t,\beta}$| for centrality 30-50%. The shaded band indicates uncertainty associated with $v_{2}$ measurements and has been calculated using two- and four-particle cumulant results as the limits.

Au+Au at 200 GeV. The correlations dependence on |p$_{t,\alpha}$ - p$_{t,\beta}$| for centrality 10-30%. The shaded band indicates uncertainty associated with $v_{2}$ measurements and has been calculated using two- and four-particle cumulant results as the limits.

Three-particle correlator in Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions compared to HIJING calculations shown as thick lines. All three particles are taken in the main TPC region, |$\eta$| < 1.0. The correlator has been scaled with number of participants and are plotted versus number of participants. In this representation HIJING results for Au+Au and Cu+Cu collisions coincide in the region of overlap.

$\langle cos(\phi_{\alpha} + \phi_{\beta} − 2\Psi_{RP})\rangle$ calculated for 200 GeV Au+Au events with event generators HIJING (with and without an “elliptic flow afterburner”), UrQMD, and MEVSIM. Blue symbols mark opposite-charge correlations, and red are same-charge. Solid stars represent the values from the data to facilitate comparison. Acceptance cuts of 0.15 < p$_{t}$ < 2 GeV/c and |$\eta$| < 1.0 were used in all cases. For MEVSIM, HIJING, and UrQMD points the true reaction plane from the generated event was used for $\Psi_{RP}$ . Thick solid lighter colored lines represent possible non-reactionplane dependent contribution from many-particle clusters as estimated by HIJING and discussed in Section VII A. Corresponding estimates from UrQMD are about factor of two smaller.

<K+>/<PI>+.

Inverse slope parameter T.

Inverse slope parameter T.

Inverse slope parameter T.

Inverse slope parameter T.

K-/PI- at y=0.

K-/PI- at y=0.

<K->/<PI->.

<K->/<PI->.

Elliptic flow versus $p_{T}$ for charged hadrons from Cu+Cu collisions at 0–60% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 22.4 GeV measured with the subevent method with a pseudorapidity gap of 0.3 units compared with previously published STAR results for 200 and 62.4 GeV Cu+Cu [27] measured with full TPC event plane method $v_{2}${TPC} and full FTPC event plane method $v_{2}${FTPC}. The error bars are statistical. Results are also compared to $v_{2}$($p_{T}$) model calculations.

Elliptic flow $v_{2}(\eta)$ for charged hadrons fromCu+Cu collisions at 0–60% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 22.4 GeV. The present STAR results are compared to the measurement from the PHOBOS [29] collaboration for Cu+Cu at 22.4 GeV. The PHOBOS results include statistical and systematic errors whereas the STAR results are plotted with statistical uncertainties only, and systematic errors are discussed in Section III C. Results are also compared to $v_{2}(\eta)$ calculations from the indicated models.

Elliptic flow $v_{2}${TPC} and $v_{2}${4} as a function of centrality for charged hadrons from Cu+Cu collisions at 0 − 60% centrality at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 22.4 GeV, compared with previously published results from the STAR collaboration at 200 GeV and 62.4 GeV.

The centrality dependence of the C$_{m,n,m+n}$ correlations versus N$_{part}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$ from 27 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The centrality dependence of the C$_{m,n,m+n}$ correlations versus N$_{part}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$ from 19.6 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The centrality dependence of the C$_{m,n,m+n}$ correlations versus N$_{part}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$ from 14.5 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The centrality dependence of the C$_{m,n,m+n}$ correlations versus N$_{part}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$ from 11.5 GeV Au+Au collisions.

The centrality dependence of the C$_{m,n,m+n}$ correlations versus N$_{part}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$ from 7.7 GeV Au+Au collisions.

Three-particle azimuthal correlations C$_{1,1,2}$ as a function of the first particles p$_{T}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$.

Three-particle azimuthal correlations C$_{1,2,3}$ as a function of the particle one p$_{T}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$.

Three-particle azimuthal correlations C$_{1,2,3}$ as a function of the particle two p$_{T}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$.

Three-particle azimuthal correlations C$_{2,2,4}$ as a function of the first particles p$_{T}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$.

Three-particle azimuthal correlations C$_{2,3,5}$ as a function of the particle one p$_{T}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$.

Three-particle azimuthal correlations C$_{2,3,5}$ as a function of the particle two p$_{T}$ for charged hadrons with p$_{T}>0.2$ GeV/c and $\eta<1$.

The $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ and centrality dependence of $v_{1}\{2\}^2$ after short-range correlations,predominantly from quantum and Coulomb effects, have been subtracted.

The $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ and centrality dependence of $v_{2}\{2\}^2$ after short-range correlations,predominantly from quantum and Coulomb effects, have been subtracted.

The $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ and centrality dependence of $v_{4}\{2\}^2$ after short-range correlations,predominantly from quantum and Coulomb effects, have been subtracted.

The $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ and centrality dependence of $v_{5}\{2\}^2$ after short-range correlations,predominantly from quantum and Coulomb effects, have been subtracted.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

INVARIANT YIELDS

RAA

RAA

RAA

RAA

pT AVERAGE RAA

Sloss

Sloss

Sloss

n_eff(xT)

n_eff(xT)

n_eff(xT)

n_eff(xT)

$p^{a}_{T} = 4-5$ GeV/$c$

$p^{a}_{T} = 5-7$ GeV/$c$

$p^{a}_{T} = 3-4$ GeV/$c$

$p^{a}_{T} = 4-5$ GeV/$c$

$p^{a}_{T} = 5-7$ GeV/$c$

$I^{out}_{AA}/I^{in}_{AA}$ ratio, central collisions

$I^{out}_{AA}/I^{in}_{AA}$ ratio, central collisions

$I^{out}_{AA}/I^{in}_{AA}$ ratio, mid-central collisions

$I^{out}_{AA}/I^{in}_{AA}$ ratio, mid-central collisions

Per-Trigger Azimuthal Yields, central collisions, 4-7 x 3-4 GeV/c

Per-Trigger Azimuthal Yields, central collisions, 4-7 x 4-5 GeV/c

Per-Trigger Azimuthal Yields, central collisions, 4-7 x 5-7 GeV/c

Per-Trigger Azimuthal Yields, mid-central collisions, 4-7 x 3-4 GeV/c

Per-Trigger Azimuthal Yields, mid-central collisions, 4-7 x 4-5 GeV/c

Per-Trigger Azimuthal Yields, mid-central collisions, 4-7 x 5-7 GeV/c

Per-Trigger Azimuthal Yields, central collisions, 4-7 x 3-4 GeV/c

$p^{a}_{T} = 3-4$ GeV/$c$

$p^{a}_{T} = 4-5$ GeV/$c$

$p^{a}_{T} = 5-7$ GeV/$c$

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (d) K− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (c) K+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (f) p¯ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (e) p in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (b) π− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (a) π+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (d) K− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (c) K+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (f) p¯ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (e) p in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (b) π− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (a) π+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (d) K− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (c) K+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (f) p¯ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (e) p in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (b) π− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (a) π+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (d) K− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (c) K+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (f) p¯ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (e) p in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (b) π− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (a) π+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (d) k- in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (c) k+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (f) pbar in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (e) p in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For clarity, ⟨Npart⟩ uncertainties are not added in quadrature.

Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For clarity, ⟨Npart⟩ uncertainties are not added in quadrature.

Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For clarity, ⟨Npart⟩ uncertainties are not added in quadrature.

Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For clarity, ⟨Npart⟩ uncertainties are not added in quadrature.

Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For clarity, ⟨Npart⟩ uncertainties are not added in quadrature.

Centrality dependences of <pT> for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV. Errors shown are quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Centrality dependences of <pT> for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV. Errors shown are quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Centrality dependences of <pT> for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV. Errors shown are quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Centrality dependences of <pT> for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV. Errors shown are quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Centrality dependences of <pT> for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV. Errors shown are quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of K−/π−, p ̄/π−, K+/π+, and p/π+ ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of K−/π−, p ̄/π−, K+/π+, and p/π+ ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of K−/π−, p ̄/π−, K+/π+, and p/π+ ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of K−/π−, p ̄/π−, K+/π+, and p/π+ ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of K−/π−, p ̄/π−, K+/π+, and p/π+ ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

The midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 as a function of √sNN for π±, K±, and p and p ̄ in 0–5% Au+Au collisions at BES energies. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

⟨mT⟩ − m of π±, K±, and p and p ̄ as a function of √sNN . Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) results are shown for 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at BES energies. The errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in central 0–5% Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

K/π ratio at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) for central 0–5% Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

The GCE model particle yields fits shown along with standard deviations for Au+Au 7.7 and Au+Au 39 GeV in 0–5% central collisions. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.

The GCE model particle ratios fits shown along with standard deviations for Au+Au 7.7 and Au+Au 39 GeV in 0–5% central collisions. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.

The SCE model particle yields fits shown along with standard deviations for Au+Au 7.7 and Au+Au 39 GeV in 0–5% central collisions. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.

The SCE model particle ratios fits shown along with standard deviations for Au+Au 7.7 and Au+Au 39 GeV in 0–5% central collisions. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.

Chemical freeze-out parameter γS plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in GCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Chemical freeze-out parameter μB plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in GCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Chemical freeze-out parameter μS plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in GCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Chemical freeze-out parameter Tch plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in GCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Chemical freeze-out parameter R plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in GCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter γS between results from particle yield fits to particle ratio fits in GCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter μB between results from particle yield fits to particle ratio fits in GCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter μS between results from particle yield fits to particle ratio fits in GCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter Tch between results from particle yield fits to particle ratio fits in GCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Chemical freeze-out parameter γS plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in SCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Chemical freeze-out parameter μB plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in SCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Chemical freeze-out parameter Tch plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in SCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Chemical freeze-out parameter R plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in SCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter γS between yield and ratio fits in SCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter μB between yield and ratio fits in SCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter Tch between yield and ratio fits in SCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter γS between GCE and SCE results using particle ratios in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter μB between GCE and SCE results using particle ratios in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter Tch between GCE and SCE results using particle ratios in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter γS between GCE and SCE results using particle yields in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter μB between GCE and SCE results using particle yields in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter Tch between GCE and SCE results using particle yields in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter R between GCE and SCE results using particle yields in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Extracted chemical freeze-out temperature vs baryon chemical potential for (a) GCE and (b) SCE cases using particle yields as input for fitting. Curves represent two model predictions [81,82]. The gray bands represent the theoretical prediction ranges of the Cleymans et al. model [81]. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Extracted chemical freeze-out temperature vs baryon chemical potential for (a) GCE and (b) SCE cases using particle yields as input for fitting. Curves represent two model predictions [81,82]. The gray bands represent the theoretical prediction ranges of the Cleymans et al. model [81]. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Extracted chemical freeze-out temperature vs baryon chemical potential for (a) GCE and (b) SCE cases using particle yields as input for fitting. Curves represent two model predictions [81,82]. The gray bands represent the theoretical prediction ranges of the Cleymans et al. model [81]. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on including more particles: Extracted chemical freeze-out parameters (a) Tch, (b) μB, and (c) γS along with (d) χ2/ndf for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting. Results are compared for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for four different sets of particle yields used in fitting. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on including more particles: Extracted chemical freeze-out parameters (a) Tch, (b) μB, and (c) γS along with (d) χ2/ndf for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting. Results are compared for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for four different sets of particle yields used in fitting. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on including more particles: Extracted chemical freeze-out parameters (a) Tch, (b) μB, and (c) γS along with (d) χ2/ndf for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting. Results are compared for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for four different sets of particle yields used in fitting. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on including more particles: Extracted chemical freeze-out parameters (a) Tch, (b) μB, and (c) γS along with (d) χ2/ndf for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting. Results are compared for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for four different sets of particle yields used in fitting. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Blast wave model fits of π±, K±, p and p p¯ T spectra in 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = (a) 7.7, (b) 11.5, (c) 19.6, (d) 27, and (e) 39 GeV. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature. Here, the uncertainties are smaller than the symbol size."

"Blast wave model fits of π±, K±, p and p p¯ T spectra in 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = (a) 7.7, (b) 11.5, (c) 19.6, (d) 27, and (e) 39 GeV. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature. Here, the uncertainties are smaller than the symbol size."

"Blast wave model fits of π±, K±, p and p p¯ T spectra in 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = (a) 7.7, (b) 11.5, (c) 19.6, (d) 27, and (e) 39 GeV. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature. Here, the uncertainties are smaller than the symbol size."

"Blast wave model fits of π±, K±, p and p p¯ T spectra in 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = (a) 7.7, (b) 11.5, (c) 19.6, (d) 27, and (e) 39 GeV. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature. Here, the uncertainties are smaller than the symbol size."

"Blast wave model fits of π±, K±, p and p p¯ T spectra in 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = (a) 7.7, (b) 11.5, (c) 19.6, (d) 27, and (e) 39 GeV. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature. Here, the uncertainties are smaller than the symbol size."

"Variation of Tkin with <β> for different energies and centralities. The centrality increases from left to right for a given energy. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,66]. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."

"Variation of Tkin with <β> for different energies and centralities. The centrality increases from left to right for a given energy. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,66]. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."

"Variation of Tkin with <β> for different energies and centralities. The centrality increases from left to right for a given energy. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,66]. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."

"Variation of Tkin with <β> for different energies and centralities. The centrality increases from left to right for a given energy. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,66]. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."

"Variation of Tkin with <β> for different energies and centralities. The centrality increases from left to right for a given energy. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,66]. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."

" (a) Energy dependence of kinetic and chemical freezeout temperatures for central heavy-ion collisions. The curves represent various theoretical predictions [81,82]. (b) Energy dependence of average transverse radial flow velocity for central heavy-ion collisions. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,53–64,66] and references therein. The BES data points are for 0–5% central collisions, AGS energies are mostly for 0–5%, SPS energies are for mostly 0–7%, and top RHIC and LHC energies are for 0–5% central collisions. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."

I_AA vs xi varying integration range

I_AA vs xi varying integration range

Transverse mass $m_T$ spectrum at midrapidity of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 158 GeV/c. $m_0$ is the PDG mass of the $\phi$ meson.

Transverse mass $m_T$ spectrum at midrapidity of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 80 GeV/c. $m_0$ is the PDG mass of the $\phi$ meson.

Dependence of the slope parameter $T$ of the transverse momentum spectrum on rapidity $y$, of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 158 GeV/c.

Dependence of the slope parameter $T$ of the transverse momentum spectrum on rapidity $y$, of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 80 GeV/c.

Dependence of the width $\sigma_y$ of the rapidity distributions on $p_T$, of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 158 GeV/c.

Dependence of the width $\sigma_y$ of the rapidity distributions on $p_T$, of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 80 GeV/c.

Rapidity spectrum of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 158 GeV/c.

Rapidity spectrum of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 80 GeV/c.

Rapidity spectrum of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at beam momentum of 40 GeV/c.

Energy dependence of ratios of total yields of $\phi$ mesons to mean total yields of pions produced in in minimum bias p+p collisions at CERN SPS energies.

Energy dependence of double ratios of total yields of $\phi$ mesons to mean total yields of pions in central Pb+Pb collisions over minimum bias p+p collisions at CERN SPS energies.

Energy dependence of total yields of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at CERN SPS energies.

Energy dependence of midrapidity yields of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at CERN SPS energies.

Widths of rapidity distributions of $\phi$ mesons produced in minimum bias p+p collisions at CERN SPS energies, as a function of beam rapidity.

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=0.4-0.9$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2.2-2.5$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2.2-2.5$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\mathrm{p}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2.94-3.1$

$\frac{1}{2\pi p_{\mathrm{T}}}\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N}{\mathrm{d}p_{\mathrm{T}}\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ for $\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ near $y=2.94-3.1$

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}y}$ versus $y$ for $\mathrm{p}$,$\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$

$\delta y$,$\delta E$ versus for $\mathrm{p}$,$\overline{\mathrm{p}}$ in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}(y-y_{\mathrm{beam}})}\frac{2}{N_{\mathrm{part}}}$ versus $\mathrm{y}-\mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}$ for BARYON-ANTIBARYON in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}(y-y_{\mathrm{beam}})}\frac{2}{N_{\mathrm{part}}}$ versus $\mathrm{y}-\mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}$ for BARYON-ANTIBARYON in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}(y-y_{\mathrm{beam}})}\frac{2}{N_{\mathrm{part}}}$ versus $\mathrm{y}-\mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}$ for BARYON-ANTIBARYON in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}(y-y_{\mathrm{beam}})}\frac{2}{N_{\mathrm{part}}}$ versus $\mathrm{y}-\mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}$ for BARYON-ANTIBARYON in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}(y-y_{\mathrm{beam}})}\frac{2}{N_{\mathrm{part}}}$ versus $\mathrm{y}-\mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}$ for BARYON-ANTIBARYON in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=200.0\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central

$\frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}(y-y_{\mathrm{beam}})}\frac{2}{N_{\mathrm{part}}}$ versus $\mathrm{y}-\mathrm{y}_{\mathrm{beam}}$ for BARYON-ANTIBARYON in $\mathrm{Au}-\mathrm{Au}$ at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=62.4\,\mathrm{Ge\!V}$ for $0-10$% central