Showing 25 of 30 results
We report on new measurements of elliptic flow ($v_2$) of electrons from heavy-flavor hadron decays at mid-rapidity ($|y|<0.8$) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{\rm NN}}}$ = 27 and 54.4 GeV from the STAR experiment. Heavy-flavor decay electrons ($e^{\rm HF}$) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{\rm NN}}}$ = 54.4 GeV exhibit a non-zero $v_2$ in the transverse momentum ($p_{\rm T}$) region of $p_{\rm T}<$ 2 GeV/$c$ with the magnitude comparable to that at $\sqrt{s_{_{\rm NN}}}=200$ GeV. The measured $e^{\rm HF}$$v_2$ at 54.4 GeV is also consistent with the expectation of their parent charm hadron $v_2$ following number-of-constituent-quark scaling as other light and strange flavor hadrons at this energy. These suggest that charm quarks gain significant collectivity through the evolution of the QCD medium and may reach local thermal equilibrium in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{\rm NN}}}=54.4$ GeV. The measured $e^{\rm HF}$$v_2$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{\rm NN}}}=$ 27 GeV is consistent with zero within large uncertainties. The energy dependence of $v_2$ for different flavor particles ($\pi,\phi,D^{0}/e^{\rm HF}$) shows an indication of quark mass hierarchy in reaching thermalization in high-energy nuclear collisions.
Density fluctuations near the QCD critical point can be probed via an intermittency analysis in relativistic heavy-ion collisions. We report the first measurement of intermittency in Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7-200 GeV measured by the STAR experiment at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC). The scaled factorial moments of identified charged hadrons are analyzed at mid-rapidity and within the transverse momentum phase space. We observe a power-law behavior of scaled factorial moments in Au$+$Au collisions and a decrease in the extracted scaling exponent ($\nu$) from peripheral to central collisions. The $\nu$ is consistent with a constant for different collisions energies in the mid-central (10-40%) collisions. Moreover, the $\nu$ in the 0-5% most central Au$+$Au collisions exhibits a non-monotonic energy dependence that reaches a possible minimum around $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 27 GeV. The physics implications on the QCD phase structure are discussed.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 19.6 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 39 GeV.
The scaled factorial moments, $F_{q}(M)$($q=$ 2-6), of identified charged hadrons ($h^{\pm}$) multiplicity in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 200 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 19.6 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 39 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 2-6) as a function of $M^{2}$ in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 200 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 11.5 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 19.6 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 27 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 39 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 54.4 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 62.4 GeV.
$\Delta F_{q}(M)$ ($q=$ 3-6) as a function of $\Delta F_{2}(M)$ in the most central Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 200 GeV.
The scaling index, $\beta_{q}$ ($q=$ 3-6), as a function of $q-1$ in the most central (0-5\%) Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 7.7-200 GeV.
The scaling exponent ($\nu$), as a function of average number of participant nucleons ($\langle N_{part}\rangle$), in Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 19.6-200 GeV. The data with the largest number of $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ correspond to the most central collisions (0-5\%), and the rest of the points are for 5-10\%, 10-20\%, 20-30\% and 30-40\% centrality, respectively. The numbers of $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 19.6 are: 338,289,225,158,108. The numbers of $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 27 GeV are: 343,299,234,166,114. The numbers of $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 39 GeV are: 342,294,230,162,111. The numbers of $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 54.4 GeV are: 346,292,228,161,111. The numbers of $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 62.4 GeV are 347,294,230,164,114. The numbers of $\langle N_{part}\rangle$ at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{_{NN}}}$ = 200 GeV are:351,299,234,168,117.
We report the triton ($t$) production in mid-rapidity ($|y| <$ 0.5) Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$= 7.7--200 GeV measured by the STAR experiment from the first phase of the beam energy scan at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC). The nuclear compound yield ratio ($\mathrm{N}_t \times \mathrm{N}_p/\mathrm{N}_d^2$), which is predicted to be sensitive to the fluctuation of local neutron density, is observed to decrease monotonically with increasing charged-particle multiplicity ($dN_{ch}/d\eta$) and follows a scaling behavior. The $dN_{ch}/d\eta$ dependence of the yield ratio is compared to calculations from coalescence and thermal models. Enhancements in the yield ratios relative to the coalescence baseline are observed in the 0%-10% most central collisions at 19.6 and 27 GeV, with a significance of 2.3$\sigma$ and 3.4$\sigma$, respectively, giving a combined significance of 4.1$\sigma$. The enhancements are not observed in peripheral collisions or model calculations without critical fluctuation, and decreases with a smaller $p_{T}$ acceptance. The physics implications of these results on the QCD phase structure and the production mechanism of light nuclei in heavy-ion collisions are discussed.
We report the measurement of $K^{*0}$ meson at midrapidity ($|y|<$ 1.0) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$~=~7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27 and 39 GeV collected by the STAR experiment during the RHIC beam energy scan (BES) program. The transverse momentum spectra, yield, and average transverse momentum of $K^{*0}$ are presented as functions of collision centrality and beam energy. The $K^{*0}/K$ yield ratios are presented for different collision centrality intervals and beam energies. The $K^{*0}/K$ ratio in heavy-ion collisions are observed to be smaller than that in small system collisions (e+e and p+p). The $K^{*0}/K$ ratio follows a similar centrality dependence to that observed in previous RHIC and LHC measurements. The data favor the scenario of the dominance of hadronic re-scattering over regeneration for $K^{*0}$ production in the hadronic phase of the medium.
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV (Multiplicity class 0-20%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV (Multiplicity class 20-40%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV (Multiplicity class 40-60%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV (Multiplicity class 60-80%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 0-10%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 10-20%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 20-30%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 30-40%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 40-60%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 60-80%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 0-10%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 10-20%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 20-30%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 30-40%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 40-60%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV (Multiplicity class 60-80%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV (Multiplicity class 0-10%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV (Multiplicity class 10-20%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV (Multiplicity class 20-30%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV (Multiplicity class 30-40%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV (Multiplicity class 40-60%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV (Multiplicity class 60-80%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV (Multiplicity class 0-10%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV (Multiplicity class 10-20%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV (Multiplicity class 20-30%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV (Multiplicity class 30-40%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV (Multiplicity class 40-60%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV (Multiplicity class 60-80%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV (Multiplicity class 0-10%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV (Multiplicity class 10-20%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV (Multiplicity class 20-30%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV (Multiplicity class 30-40%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV (Multiplicity class 40-60%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$-differential yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV (Multiplicity class 60-80%).
$p_{\mathrm T}$- integrated yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$p_{\mathrm T}$- integrated yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$p_{\mathrm T}$- integrated yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$p_{\mathrm T}$- integrated yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$p_{\mathrm T}$- integrated yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$p_{\mathrm T}$- integrated yield of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
<$p_{\mathrm T}$> of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
<$p_{\mathrm T}$> of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
<$p_{\mathrm T}$> of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
<$p_{\mathrm T}$> of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
<$p_{\mathrm T}$> of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
<$p_{\mathrm T}$> of $\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. $<(dN_{ch}/dy)^{1/3}>$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. $<(dN_{ch}/dy)^{1/3}>$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~11.5 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. $<(dN_{ch}/dy)^{1/3}>$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. $<(dN_{ch}/dy)^{1/3}>$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. $<(dN_{ch}/dy)^{1/3}>$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{\mathrm{K^{*0}} + \bar{\mathrm{K^{*0}}}}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. $<(dN_{ch}/dy)^{1/3}>$ in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV. Total systematic error is the quadrature sum of the correlated and uncorrelated systematic errors
$\frac{2\phi}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV
$\frac{2\phi}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV
$\frac{2\phi}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV
$\frac{2\phi}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV
$\frac{2\phi}{K^{+} + K^{-}}$ vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV
lower limit of hadronic phase lifetime vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$7.7 GeV
lower limit of hadronic phase lifetime vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$11.5 GeV
lower limit of hadronic phase lifetime vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$14.5 GeV
lower limit of hadronic phase lifetime vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$19.6 GeV
lower limit of hadronic phase lifetime vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$27 GeV
lower limit of hadronic phase lifetime vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$39 GeV
lower limit of hadronic phase lifetime vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$62.4 GeV
lower limit of hadronic phase lifetime vs. < Npart > in AuAu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}~=~$200 GeV
Rapidity-odd directed flow measurements at midrapidity are presented for $\Lambda$, $\bar{\Lambda}$, $K^\pm$, $K^0_s$ and $\phi$ at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV in Au+Au collisions recorded by the STAR detector at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider. These measurements greatly expand the scope of data available to constrain models with differing prescriptions for the equation of state of quantum chromodynamics. Results show good sensitivity for testing a picture where flow is assumed to be imposed before hadron formation and the observed particles are assumed to form via coalescence of constituent quarks. The pattern of departure from a coalescence-inspired sum-rule can be a valuable new tool for probing the collision dynamics.
We present STAR measurements of strange hadron ($\mathrm{K}^{0}_{\mathrm S}$, $\Lambda$, $\overline{\Lambda}$, $\Xi^-$, $\overline{\Xi}^+$, $\Omega^-$, $\overline{\Omega}^+$, and $\phi$) production at mid-rapidity ($|y| < 0.5$) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{\mathrm{NN}}}}$ = 7.7 - 39 GeV from the Beam Energy Scan Program at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC). Transverse momentum spectra, averaged transverse mass, and the overall integrated yields of these strange hadrons are presented versus the centrality and collision energy. Antibaryon-to-baryon ratios ($\overline{\Lambda}$/$\Lambda$, $\overline{\Xi}^+$/$\Xi^-$, $\overline{\Omega}^+$/$\Omega^-$) are presented as well, and used to test a thermal statistical model and to extract the temperature normalized strangeness and baryon chemical potentials at hadronic freeze-out ($\mu_{B}/T_{\rm ch}$ and $\mu_{S}/T_{\rm ch}$) in central collisions. Strange baryon-to-pion ratios are compared to various model predictions in central collisions for all energies. The nuclear modification factors ($R_{\textrm{CP}}$) and antibaryon-to-meson ratios as a function of transverse momentum are presented for all collision energies. The $\mathrm{K}^{0}_{\mathrm S}$$R_{\textrm{CP}}$ shows no suppression for $p_{\rm T}$ up to 3.5 $\mathrm{GeV} / c$ at energies of 7.7 and 11.5 GeV. The $\overline{\Lambda}$/$\mathrm{K}^{0}_{\mathrm S}$ ratio also shows baryon-to-meson enhancement at intermediate $p_{\rm T}$ ($\approx$2.5 $\mathrm{GeV} / c$) in central collisions at energies above 19.6 GeV. Both observations suggest that there is likely a change of the underlying strange quark dynamics at collision energies below 19.6 GeV.
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
Data from STAR beam energy scan (Phase I) at RHIC, for mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5)
We report the first measurements of a complete second-order cumulant matrix of net-charge, net-proton, and net-kaon multiplicity distributions for the first phase of the beam energy scan program at RHIC. This includes the centrality and, for the first time, the pseudorapidity window dependence of both diagonal and off-diagonal cumulants in Au+Au collisions at \sNN~= 7.7-200 GeV. Within the available acceptance of $|\eta|<0.5$, the cumulants grow linearly with the pseudorapidity window. Relative to the corresponding measurements in peripheral collisions, the ratio of off-diagonal over diagonal cumulants in central collisions indicates an excess correlation between net-charge and net-kaon, as well as between net-charge and net-proton. The strength of such excess correlation increases with the collision energy. The correlation between net-proton and net-kaon multiplicity distributions is observed to be negative at \sNN~= 200 GeV and change to positive at the lowest collision energy. Model calculations based on non-thermal (UrQMD) and thermal (HRG) production of hadrons cannot explain the data. These measurements will help map the QCD phase diagram, constrain hadron resonance gas model calculations, and provide new insights on the energy dependence of baryon-strangeness correlations. An erratum has been added to address the issue of self-correlation in the previously considered efficiency correction for off-diagonal cumulant measurement. Previously considered unidentified (net-)charge correlation results ($\sigma^{11}_{Q,p}$ and $\sigma^{11}_{Q,k})$ are now replaced with identified (net-)charge correlation ($\sigma^{11}_{Q^{PID},p}$ and $\sigma^{11}_{Q^{PID},k}$)
The dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal and off-diagonal cumulants on the width of the η-window. The filled and open circles represent 0-5% and 70-80% central collisions respectively. The shaded band represents the systematic uncertainty. The statistical uncertainties are within the marker size and solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
The dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal and off-diagonal cumulants on the width of the η-window. The filled and open circles represent 0-5% and 70-80% central collisions respectively. The shaded band represents the systematic uncertainty. The statistical uncertainties are within the marker size and solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli- sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Error bars are statistical and boxes are systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Error bars are statistical and boxes are systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Beam energy dependence of cumulant ratios (Cp,k,CQ,k and CQ,p; top to bottom) of net-proton, net-kaon and net-charge (identified) for Au+Au collisions at sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The bands denote the UrQMD calculations for 0-5% and 70-80% central collisions and the HRG values are denoted by red dotted lines. The Poisson baseline is denoted by black dashed lines. Error bars are statistical and boxes are systematic errors.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of efficiency corrected second-order diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-kaon and net-pion (top to bottom) of the multiplicity distributions for Au+Au collisions at GeV (left to right) within kinematic range of |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. The boxes represent the systematic error. The statistical error bars are within the marker size. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal cumulants of net-proton, net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au colli-sions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The dashed lines represent scaling predicted by the central limit theorem and the solid lines are UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Centrality dependence of second-order off-diagonal to diagonal cumulants ratios of net-proton, identified net-charge and net-kaon for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV (left to right) within the kinematic range |η| < 0.5 and 0.4 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c. Bars represent statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors. The solid lines represent the UrQMD calculations.
Beam energy dependence of cumulant ratios (Cp,k,CQ,k and CQ,p; top to bottom) of net-proton, net-kaon and identified net-charge for Au+Au collisions at sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The bands denote the UrQMD calculations for 0-5% and 70-80% central collisions and the HRG values are denoted by red dotted lines. The Poisson baseline is denoted by black dashed lines. Bars show statistical errors and boxes show systematic errors.
The extreme temperatures and energy densities generated by ultra-relativistic collisions between heavy nuclei produce a state of matter with surprising fluid properties. Non-central collisions have angular momentum on the order of 1000$\hbar$, and the resulting fluid may have a strong vortical structure that must be understood to properly describe the fluid. It is also of particular interest because the restoration of fundamental symmetries of quantum chromodynamics is expected to produce novel physical effects in the presence of strong vorticity. However, no experimental indications of fluid vorticity in heavy ion collisions have so far been found. Here we present the first measurement of an alignment between the angular momentum of a non-central collision and the spin of emitted particles, revealing that the fluid produced in heavy ion collisions is by far the most vortical system ever observed. We find that $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ hyperons show a positive polarization of the order of a few percent, consistent with some hydrodynamic predictions. A previous measurement that reported a null result at higher collision energies is seen to be consistent with the trend of our new observations, though with larger statistical uncertainties. These data provide the first experimental access to the vortical structure of the "perfect fluid" created in a heavy ion collision. They should prove valuable in the development of hydrodynamic models that quantitatively connect observations to the theory of the Strong Force. Our results extend the recent discovery of hydrodynamic spin alignment to the subatomic realm.
Lambda and AntiLambda polarization as a function of collision energy. A 0.8% error on the alpha value used in the paper is corrected in this table. Systematic error bars include those associated with particle identification (negligible), uncertainty in the value of the hyperon decay parameter (2%) and reaction plane resolution (2%) and detector efficiency corrections (4%). The dominant systematic error comes from statistical fluctuations of the estimated combinatoric background under the (anti-)$\Lambda$ mass peak.
Lambda and AntiLambda polarization as a function of collision energy calculated using the new $\alpha_\Lambda=0.732$ updated on PDG2020. Systematic error bars include those associated with particle identification (negligible), uncertainty in the value of the hyperon decay parameter (2%) and reaction plane resolution (2%) and detector efficiency corrections (4%). The dominant systematic error comes from statistical fluctuations of the estimated combinatoric background under the (anti-)$\Lambda$ mass peak.
Elliptic flow (v_2) values for identified particles at midrapidity in Au + Au collisions measured by the STAR experiment in the Beam Energy Scan at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider at sqrt{s_{NN}}= 7.7--62.4 GeV are presented for three centrality classes. The centrality dependence and the data at sqrt{s_{NN}}= 14.5 GeV are new. Except at the lowest beam energies we observe a similar relative v_2 baryon-meson splitting for all centrality classes which is in agreement within 15% with the number-of-constituent quark scaling. The larger v_2 for most particles relative to antiparticles, already observed for minimum bias collisions, shows a clear centrality dependence, with the largest difference for the most central collisions. Also, the results are compared with A Multiphase Transport Model and fit with a Blast Wave model.
No description provided.
The difference in $v_{2}$ between particles (X) and their corresponding antiparticles $\bar{X}$ (see legend) as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ for 10%-40% central Au + Au collisions. The systematic errors are shown by the hooked error bars. The dashed lines in the plot are fits with a power-law function.
No description provided.
The difference in $v_{2}$ between protons and antiprotons as a function of $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ for 0%-10%, 10%-40% and 40%-80% central Au + Au collisions. The systematic errors are shown by the hooked error bars. The dashed lines in the plot are fits with a power-law function.
No description provided.
The relative difference. The systematic errors are shown by the hooked error bars. The dashed lines in the plot are fits with a power-law function.
No description provided.
The $v_{2}$ difference between protons and antiprotons (and between $\pi^{+}$ and $pi^{-}$) for 10%-40% centrality Au+Au collisions at 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, and 19.6 GeV. The $v_{2}{BBC} results were slightly shifted horizontally.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
No description provided.
The two-particle angular correlation functions, $R_2$, of pions, kaons, and protons in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4, and 200 GeV were measured by the STAR experiment at RHIC. These correlations were measured for both like-sign and unlike-sign charge combinations and versus the centrality. The correlations of pions and kaons show the expected near-side ({\it i.e.}, at small relative angles) peak resulting from short-range mechanisms. The amplitudes of these short-range correlations decrease with increasing beam energy. However, the proton correlation functions exhibit strong anticorrelations in the near-side region. This behavior is observed for the first time in an A+A collision system. The observed anticorrelation is $p_{T}$-independent and decreases with increasing beam energy and centrality. The experimental results are also compared to the Monte Carlo models UrQMD, Hijing, and AMPT.
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 7.7 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 11.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 14.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 19.6 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 27 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 39 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 64.2 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 200 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 7.7 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 11.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 14.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 19.6 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 27 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 39 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 64.2 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign pions in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 200 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 7.7 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 11.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 14.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 19.6 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 27 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 39 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 64.2 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 200 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 7.7 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 11.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 14.5 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 19.6 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 27 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 39 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 64.2 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign protons in Au+Au collisions at mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.4 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c at 200 GeV
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of like- sign kaons in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV, mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c
Angular correlation function R2(∆y,∆φ) of unlike-sign kaons in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV, mid centrality 30%-40% and 0.2 < pT < 1.6 GeV/c.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) pions in Au+Au collisions at 30%-40% centrality and eight different energies from 7.7 GeV (top left) to 200 GeV (bottom right). Also shown at the highest beam energies in the right frames are the antiproton-antiproton correlations.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) protons in Au+Au collisions at 30%-40% centrality and eight different energies from 7.7 GeV (top left) to 200 GeV (bottom right). Also shown at the highest beam energies in the right frames are the antiproton-antiproton correlations.
Near-side and away-side ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ projection of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) pions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom), 30%-40% centrality.
Near-side and away-side ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ projection of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) protons in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom), 30%-40% centrality.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) pions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom), 30%-40% centrality compared with the UrQMD (solid line), Hijing (dash-dotted line), and AMPT (dotted line) simulations.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) protons in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom), 30%-40% centrality compared with the UrQMD (solid line), Hijing (dash-dotted line), and AMPT (dotted line) simulations.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) pions in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom) for the most central 0%-5%, mid-central 30%-40% and pe- ripheral 60%-70% events.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) protons in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom) for the most central 0%-5%, mid-central 30%-40% and pe- ripheral 60%-70% events.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) pions in low and high pT in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom) in 30%-40% centrality.
Projection of correlation function ⟨R2(∆y)⟩ of like-sign (red) and unlike-sign (blue) protons in low and high pT in Au+Au collisions at 14.5 GeV (top) and 62.4 GeV (bottom) in 30%-40% centrality.
We report a systematic measurement of cumulants, $C_{n}$, for net-proton, proton and antiproton multiplicity distributions, and correlation functions, $\kappa_n$, for proton and antiproton multiplicity distributions up to the fourth order in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm {NN}}}$ = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 54.4, 62.4 and 200 GeV. The $C_{n}$ and $\kappa_n$ are presented as a function of collision energy, centrality and kinematic acceptance in rapidity, $y$, and transverse momentum, $p_{T}$. The data were taken during the first phase of the Beam Energy Scan (BES) program (2010 -- 2017) at the BNL Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) facility. The measurements are carried out at midrapidity ($|y| <$ 0.5) and transverse momentum 0.4 $<$$p_{\rm T}$$<$ 2.0 GeV/$c$, using the STAR detector at RHIC. We observe a non-monotonic energy dependence ($\sqrt{s_{\mathrm {NN}}}$ = 7.7 -- 62.4 GeV) of the net-proton $C_{4}$/$C_{2}$ with the significance of 3.1$\sigma$ for the 0-5% central Au+Au collisions. This is consistent with the expectations of critical fluctuations in a QCD-inspired model. Thermal and transport model calculations show a monotonic variation with $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm {NN}}}$. For the multiparticle correlation functions, we observe significant negative values for a two-particle correlation function, $\kappa_2$, of protons and antiprotons, which are mainly due to the effects of baryon number conservation. Furthermore, it is found that the four-particle correlation function, $\kappa_4$, of protons plays a role in determining the energy dependence of proton $C_4/C_1$ below 19.6 GeV, which cannot be understood by the effect of baryon number conservation.
Measurements of the elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, of identified hadrons ($\pi^{\pm}$, $K^{\pm}$, $K_{s}^{0}$, $p$, $\bar{p}$, $\phi$, $\Lambda$, $\bar{\Lambda}$, $\Xi^{-}$, $\bar{\Xi}^{+}$, $\Omega^{-}$, $\bar{\Omega}^{+}$) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 7.7, 11.5, 19.6, 27, 39 and 62.4 GeV are presented. The measurements were done at mid-rapidity using the Time Projection Chamber and the Time-of-Flight detectors of the STAR experiment during the Beam Energy Scan program at RHIC. A significant difference in the $v_{2}$ values for particles and the corresponding anti-particles was observed at all transverse momenta for the first time. The difference increases with decreasing center-of-mass energy, $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ (or increasing baryon chemical potential, $\mu_{B}$) and is larger for the baryons as compared to the mesons. This implies that particles and anti-particles are no longer consistent with the universal number-of-constituent quark (NCQ) scaling of $v_{2}$ that was observed at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 200 GeV. However, for the group of particles NCQ scaling at $(m_{T}-m_{0})/n_{q}>$ 0.4 GeV/$c^{2}$ is not violated within $\pm$10%. The $v_{2}$ values for $\phi$ mesons at 7.7 and 11.5 GeV are approximately two standard deviations from the trend defined by the other hadrons at the highest measured $p_{T}$ values.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow,v_2, as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T, from 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for various particle species and energies.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected particles re plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< pT<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p__T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2 (p_T), in 0–80% central Au+Au collisions for selected anti-particles are plotted only for the transverse momentum range of 0.2< p_T<1.6 GeV/c to emphasize the mass ordering at low p_T.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged pions as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged koans as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged kaons as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged koans as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged koans as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged koans as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged koans as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged koans as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged koans as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of charged koans as a function of the transverse momentum,p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions. Different ∆v_2 ranges were used for the upper and lower panels.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of p, $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au. collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Lambda$ and $\overline{\Lambda}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $\Xi^{-}$ and $\overline{\Xi^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of $Omega^{-}$ and $\overline{\Omega^{+}}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of Λ,Λbar as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions
The elliptic flow,v_2, of $\phi$ mesons as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of $\phi$ mesons as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of $\phi$ mesons as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of $\phi$ mesons as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of $\phi$ mesons as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of $\phi$ mesons as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 0–10% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2 of Λ,Λbar as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T,for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 10–40% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow, v_2, of p and $\overline{p}$ as a function of the transverse momentum, p_T, for 40–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The elliptic flow,v_2, of 0–80% central Au+Au collisions as a function of the reduced transverse mass,$ m_T−m_0 $, for selected anti-particles.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of √sNN for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of √sNN for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of √sNN for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of √sNN for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of √sNN for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of $μ_B$ for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of $μ_B$ for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of $μ_B$ for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of $μ_B$ for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The difference in the v_2 values between a particle X and its corresponding anti-particle $\overline{X}$ as a function of $μ_B$ for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions.
The proton and anti-proton elliptic flow for 0–80% central Au+Au collisions at √sNN= 19.6 GeV, where “(+,-) EP” refers to the event plane reconstructed using all of the charged particles and “(-) EP” refers to the event plane reconstructed using only the negatively charged particles.
We report systematic measurements of bulk properties of the system created in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$ = 14.5 GeV recorded by the STAR detector at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC).The transverse momentum spectra of $\pi^{\pm}$, $K^{\pm}$ and $p(\bar{p})$ are studied at mid-rapidity ($|y| < 0.1$) for nine centrality intervals. The centrality, transverse momentum ($p_T$),and pseudorapidity ($\eta$) dependence of inclusive charged particle elliptic flow ($v_2$), and rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow ($v_{1}$) results near mid-rapidity are also presented. These measurements are compared with the published results from Au+Au collisions at other energies, and from Pb+Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$ = 2.76 TeV. The results at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$ = 14.5 GeV show similar behavior as established at other energies and fit well in the energy dependence trend. These results are important as the 14.5 GeV energy fills the gap in $\mu_B$, which is of the order of 100 MeV,between $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}$ =11.5 and 19.6 GeV. Comparisons of the data with UrQMD and AMPT models show poor agreement in general.
The $p_{T}$ spectra of proton measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicated in the legend
The $p_{T}$ spectra of antiproton measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicatedin the legend
The $p_{T}$ spectra of $\pi^{+}$ measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicatedin the legend
The $p_{T}$ spectra of $\pi^{-}$ measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicatedin the legend
The $p_{T}$ spectra of $K^{+}$ measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicatedin the legend
The $p_{T}$ spectra of $K^{-}$ measured at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV. Spectra are plotted for nine centrality classes, with some spectra multiplied by a scale factor to improve clarity, as indicatedin the legend
Average $p_{T}$ of $\pi^{+}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Average $p_{T}$ of $\pi^{-}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Average $p_{T}$ of $K^{+}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Average $p_{T}$ of $K^{-}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$= 14.5 GeV.
Average $p_{T}$ of p as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Average $p_{T}$ of p-bar as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of $\pi^{+}$ scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of $\pi^{-}$ scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of $K^{+}$ scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of $K^{-}$ scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of proton scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
dN/dy of p-bar scaled by 0.5*$N_{part}$ as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Kinetic freeze-out temperature as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Velocity as a function of number of participant for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
The event plane resolution calculated for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV as a function of centrality.
Inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 at mid-pseudorapidity (|y| <1.0) as a function of $p_{T}$ for 10-20% centrality in Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 at mid-pseudorapidity (|y| <1.0) as a function of $p_{T}$ for 20-30% centrality in Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 at mid-pseudorapidity (|y| <1.0) as a function of $p_{T}$ for 30-40% centrality in Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 at mid-pseudorapidity (|y| <1.0) as a function of transverse momentum $p_{T}$ for six centrality classes, obtained using the $\eta$-sub event plane method in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 at mid-pseudorapidity (|y| <1.0) as a function of $p_{T}$-integrated v2($\eta$) for six centrality classes, obtained using the $\eta$-sub event plane method in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
The ratio inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2 over root-mean-square participant eccentricity $Epart_{2}$ at mid-pseudorapidity as a function of $p_{T}$ for 10–20%, 30–40%, and 50–60% collision centralities in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Summary of centrality bins, average number of participants $N_{part}$, number of binary collisions $N_{coll}$, reaction plane eccentricity eRP, participant eccentricity epart, root-mean-square of the participant eccentricity epart{2}, and transverse area $S_{part}$ from MC Glauber simulations at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
The inclusive charged particle elliptic flow v2($\eta$-sub) versus pseudorapidity $\eta$ at mid-pseudorapidity for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27.0 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of $p_{T}$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39.0 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27.0 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39.0 GeV for 0–10%, 10–40% and 40–80% centrality intervals.
Rapidity-odd charged particles directed flow v1 as a function of pseudorapidity $\eta$ in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 – 39 GeV for 30-60% centrality intervals.
We present two-particle $p_{\rm t}$ correlations as a function of event centrality for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4, and 200 GeV at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider using the STAR detector. These results are compared to previous measurements from CERES at the Super Proton Synchrotron and from ALICE at the Large Hadron Collider. The data are compared with UrQMD model calculations and with a model based on a Boltzmann-Langevin approach incorporating effects from thermalization. The relative dynamical correlations for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV show a power law dependence on the number of participant nucleons and agree with the results for Pb+Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 2.76~ {\rm TeV}$ from ALICE. As the collision energy is lowered from $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV to 7.7 GeV, the centrality dependence of the relative dynamical correlations departs from the power law behavior observed at the higher collision energies. In central collisions, the relative dynamical correlations increase with collision energy up to $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV in contrast to previous measurements that showed little dependence on the collision energy.
'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'
'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'
'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'
'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'
'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'
'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'
'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'
'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'
'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'
'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'
'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'
'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'
'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'
We report the energy dependence of mid-rapidity (anti-)deuteron production in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}} =\ $7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4, and 200 GeV, measured by the STAR experiment at RHIC. The yield of deuterons is found to be well described by the thermal model. The collision energy, centrality, and transverse momentum dependence of the coalescence parameter $B_2$ are discussed. We find that the values of $B_2$ for anti-deuterons are systematically lower than those for deuterons, indicating that the correlation volume of anti-baryons is larger than that of baryons at $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}$ from 19.6 to 39 GeV. In addition, values of $B_2$ are found to vary with collision energy and show a broad minimum around $\sqrt{s_\text{NN}}=\ $20 to 40 GeV, which might imply a change of the equation of state of the medium in these collisions.
We present measurements of 2$^{nd}$ order azimuthal anisotropy ($v_{2}$) at mid-rapidity $(|y|<1.0)$ for light nuclei d, t, $^{3}$He (for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200, 62.4, 39, 27, 19.6, 11.5, and 7.7 GeV) and anti-nuclei $\bar{\rm d}$ ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200, 62.4, 39, 27, and 19.6 GeV) and $^{3}\bar{\rm He}$ ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV) in the STAR (Solenoidal Tracker at RHIC) experiment. The $v_{2}$ for these light nuclei produced in heavy-ion collisions is compared with those for p and $\bar{\rm p}$. We observe mass ordering in nuclei $v_{2}(p_{T})$ at low transverse momenta ($p_{T}<2.0$ GeV/$c$). We also find a centrality dependence of $v_{2}$ for d and $\bar{\rm d}$. The magnitude of $v_{2}$ for t and $^{3}$He agree within statistical errors. Light-nuclei $v_{2}$ are compared with predictions from a blast wave model. Atomic mass number ($A$) scaling of light-nuclei $v_{2}(p_{T})$ seems to hold for $p_{T}/A < 1.5$ GeV/$c$. Results on light-nuclei $v_{2}$ from a transport-plus-coalescence model are consistent with the experimental measurements.
Elliptic flow ($v_{2}$) values for identified particles at mid-rapidity in Au+Au collisions, measured by the STAR experiment in the Beam Energy Scan at RHIC at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 7.7--62.4 GeV, are presented. A beam-energy dependent difference of the values of $v_{2}$ between particles and corresponding anti-particles was observed. The difference increases with decreasing beam energy and is larger for baryons compared to mesons. This implies that, at lower energies, particles and anti-particles are not consistent with the universal number-of-constituent-quark (NCQ) scaling of $v_{2}$ that was observed at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 200 GeV.
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 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).
A systematic study is presented for centrality, transverse momentum ($p_T$) and pseudorapidity ($\eta$) dependence of the inclusive charged hadron elliptic flow ($v_2$) at midrapidity($|\eta| < 1.0$) in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7, 11.5, 19.6, 27 and 39 GeV. The results obtained with different methods, including correlations with the event plane reconstructed in a region separated by a large pseudorapidity gap and 4-particle cumulants ($v_2{4}$), are presented in order to investigate non-flow correlations and $v_2$ fluctuations. We observe that the difference between $v_2{2}$ and $v_2{4}$ is smaller at the lower collision energies. Values of $v_2$, scaled by the initial coordinate space eccentricity, $v_{2}/\varepsilon$, as a function of $p_T$ are larger in more central collisions, suggesting stronger collective flow develops in more central collisions, similar to the results at higher collision energies. These results are compared to measurements at higher energies at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 and 200 GeV) and at the Large Hadron Collider (Pb + Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 2.76 TeV). The $v_2(p_T)$ values for fixed $p_T$ rise with increasing collision energy within the $p_T$ range studied ($< 2 {\rm GeV}/c$). A comparison to viscous hydrodynamic simulations is made to potentially help understand the energy dependence of $v_{2}(p_{T})$. We also compare the $v_2$ results to UrQMD and AMPT transport model calculations, and physics implications on the dominance of partonic versus hadronic phases in the system created at Beam Energy Scan (BES) energies are discussed.
The event plane resolutions for Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7, 11.5, 19.6, 27 and 39 GeV as a function of collision centrality.
The comparison of $v_2$ as a function of $p_T$ between GF-cumulant and Q-cumulant methods in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV.
The $p_T$ (> 0.2 GeV/c) and $\eta$ ($∣\eta∣$ < 1) integrated $v_2$ as a function of collision centrality for Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV, 11.5 GeV, 19.6 GeV, 27 GeV and 39 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.
New measurements of directed flow for charged hadrons, characterized by the Fourier coefficient \vone, are presented for transverse momenta $\mathrm{p_T}$, and centrality intervals in Au+Au collisions recorded by the STAR experiment for the center-of-mass energy range $\mathrm{\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}} = 7.7 - 200$ GeV. The measurements underscore the importance of momentum conservation and the characteristic dependencies on $\mathrm{\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}}$, centrality and $\mathrm{p_T}$ are consistent with the expectations of geometric fluctuations generated in the initial stages of the collision, acting in concert with a hydrodynamic-like expansion. The centrality and $\mathrm{p_T}$ dependencies of $\mathrm{v^{even}_{1}}$, as well as an observed similarity between its excitation function and that for $\mathrm{v_3}$, could serve as constraints for initial-state models. The $\mathrm{v^{even}_{1}}$ excitation function could also provide an important supplement to the flow measurements employed for precision extraction of the temperature dependence of the specific shear viscosity.
$v_{11}$ vs. $p_{T}^{b}$ for several selections of $p_{T}^{a}$ for 0-5 central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}} = 200$ GeV. The curve shows the result of the simultaneous fit.
Extracted values of $v^{even}_{1}$ vs. $p_{T}$ for 0-10 central Au+Au collisions for several values of $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}$ as indicated; the $v^{even}_{1}$ values are obtained via fits. The curve in panel (a) shows the result from a viscous hydrodynamically based predictions.
(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).
(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.
We report measurements of the nuclear modification factor, $R_{ \mathrm{CP}}$, for charged hadrons as well as identified $\pi^{+(-)}$, $K^{+(-)}$, and $p(\overline{p})$ for Au+Au collision energies of $\sqrt{s_{_{ \mathrm{NN}}}}$ = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 62.4 GeV. We observe a clear high-$p_{\mathrm{T}}$ net suppression in central collisions at 62.4 GeV for charged hadrons which evolves smoothly to a large net enhancement at lower energies. This trend is driven by the evolution of the pion spectra, but is also very similar for the kaon spectra. While the magnitude of the proton $R_{ \mathrm{CP}}$ at high $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ does depend on collision energy, neither the proton nor the anti-proton $R_{ \mathrm{CP}}$ at high $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ exhibit net suppression at any energy. A study of how the binary collision scaled high-$p_{\mathrm{T}}$ yield evolves with centrality reveals a non-monotonic shape that is consistent with the idea that jet-quenching is increasing faster than the combined phenomena that lead to enhancement.
Charged hadron RCP for RHIC BES energies. 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. The vertical uncertainty bars correspond to statistical uncertainties and the boxes to systematic uncertainties.
Identified particle (Pion 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 (Pion 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 (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
Balance functions have been measured in terms of relative pseudorapidity ($\Delta \eta$) for charged particle pairs at the Relativistic Heavy-Ion Collider (RHIC) from Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV to 200 GeV using the STAR detector. These results are compared with balance functions measured at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) from Pb+Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 2.76 TeV by the ALICE Collaboration. The width of the balance function decreases as the collisions become more central and as the beam energy is increased. In contrast, the widths of the balance functions calculated using shuffled events show little dependence on centrality or beam energy and are larger than the observed widths. Balance function widths calculated using events generated by UrQMD are wider than the measured widths in central collisions and show little centrality dependence. The measured widths of the balance functions in central collisions are consistent with the delayed hadronization of a deconfined quark gluon plasma (QGP). The narrowing of the balance function in central collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV implies that a QGP is still being created at this relatively low energy.
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 $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=7.7$ 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 $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=11.5$ 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 $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=19.6$ 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 $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=27$ 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 $a + b(N_{part})^{0.01}$.
Fluctuations of conserved quantities such as baryon number, charge, and strangeness are sensitive to the correlation length of the hot and dense matter created in relativistic heavy-ion collisions and can be used to search for the QCD critical point. We report the first measurements of the moments of net-kaon multiplicity distributions in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4, and 200 GeV. The collision centrality and energy dependence of the mean ($M$), variance ($\sigma^2$), skewness ($S$), and kurtosis ($\kappa$) for net-kaon multiplicity distributions as well as the ratio $\sigma^2/M$ and the products $S\sigma$ and $\kappa\sigma^2$ are presented. Comparisons are made with Poisson and negative binomial baseline calculations as well as with UrQMD, a transport model (UrQMD) that does not include effects from the QCD critical point. Within current uncertainties, the net-kaon cumulant ratios appear to be monotonic as a function of collision energy.
We present measurements of three-particle correlations for various harmonics in Au+Au collisions at energies ranging from $\sqrt{s_{{\rm NN}}}=7.7$ to 200 GeV using the STAR detector. The quantity $\langle\cos(m\phi_1+n\phi_2-(m+n)\phi_3)\rangle$ is evaluated as a function of $\sqrt{s_{{\rm NN}}}$, collision centrality, transverse momentum, $p_T$, pseudo-rapidity difference, $\Delta\eta$, and harmonics ($m$ and $n$). These data provide detailed information on global event properties like the three-dimensional structure of the initial overlap region, the expansion dynamics of the matter produced in the collisions, and the transport properties of the medium. A strong dependence on $\Delta\eta$ is observed for most harmonic combinations consistent with breaking of longitudinal boost invariance. Data reveal changes with energy in the two-particle correlation functions relative to the second-harmonic event-plane and provide ways to constrain models of heavy-ion collisions over a wide range of collision energies.
We present measurements of bulk properties of the matter produced in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 7.7, 11.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV using identified hadrons ($\pi^\pm$, $K^\pm$, $p$ and $\bar{p}$) from the STAR experiment in the Beam Energy Scan (BES) Program at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC). Midrapidity ($|y|<$0.1) results for multiplicity densities $dN/dy$, average transverse momenta $\langle p_T \rangle$ and particle ratios are presented. The chemical and kinetic freeze-out dynamics at these energies are discussed and presented as a function of collision centrality and energy. These results constitute the systematic measurements of bulk properties of matter formed in heavy-ion collisions over a broad range of energy (or baryon chemical potential) at RHIC.
The average number of participating nucleons (⟨Npart⟩) for various collision centralities in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7–39 GeV.
Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (b) π- 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 (a) π+ 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 (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."
Local parity-odd domains are theorized to form inside a Quark-Gluon-Plasma (QGP) which has been produced in high-energy heavy-ion collisions. The local parity-odd domains manifest themselves as charge separation along the magnetic field axis via the chiral magnetic effect (CME). The experimental observation of charge separation has previously been reported for heavy-ion collisions at the top RHIC energies. In this paper, we present the results of the beam-energy dependence of the charge correlations in Au+Au collisions at midrapidity for center-of-mass energies of 7.7, 11.5, 19.6, 27, 39 and 62.4 GeV from the STAR experiment. After background subtraction, the signal gradually reduces with decreased beam energy, and tends to vanish by 7.7 GeV. The implications of these results for the CME will be discussed.
The three-point correlator, $\gamma$, as a function of centrality for Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV.
The three-point correlator, $\gamma$, as a function of centrality for Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV.
The three-point correlator, $\gamma$, as a function of centrality for Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV.
The three-point correlator, $\gamma$, as a function of centrality for Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV.
The three-point correlator, $\gamma$, as a function of centrality for Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV.
The three-point correlator, $\gamma$, as a function of centrality for Au+Au collisions at 7.7.
The two-particle correlation as a function of centrality for Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV.
The two-particle correlation as a function of centrality for Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV.
The two-particle correlation as a function of centrality for Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV.
The two-particle correlation as a function of centrality for Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV.
The two-particle correlation as a function of centrality for Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV.
The two-particle correlation as a function of centrality for Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV.
$H_{SS}-H{OS}$, as a function of beam energy for 60-80% centrality in Au+Au collisions.
$H_{SS}-H{OS}$, as a function of beam energy for 30-60% centrality in Au+Au collisions.
$H_{SS}-H{OS}$, as a function of beam energy for 10-30% centrality in Au+Au collisions.
When you search on a word, e.g. 'collisions', we will automatically search across everything we store about a record. But, sometimes you may wish to be more specific. Here we show you how.
Guidance and examples on the query string syntax can be found in the Elasticsearch documentation.
About HEPData Submitting to HEPData HEPData File Formats HEPData Coordinators HEPData Terms of Use HEPData Cookie Policy
Status Email Forum Twitter GitHub
Copyright ~1975-Present, HEPData | Powered by Invenio, funded by STFC, hosted and originally developed at CERN, supported and further developed at IPPP Durham.