Corrected inclusive charged-particle jet distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV for R=0.2, 0.3, and 0.4 in peripheral (60-80%) Au+Au collisions for pTlead,min = 7 GeV/c. The first uncertainty is statistical (symmetric), followed by shape uncertainty (asymmetric) and correlated uncertainty (asymmetric).

pTlead,min (7/5 GeV/c) ratios of inclusive charged-particle jet distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV for R=0.2, 0.3, and 0.4 in peripheral Au+Au collisions. The first uncertainty is statistical (symmetric), followed by shape uncertainty (asymmetric) and correlated uncertainty (asymmetric).

pTlead,min (7/5 GeV/c) ratios of inclusive charged-particle jet distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV for R=0.2, 0.3, and 0.4 in central Au+Au collisions. The first uncertainty is statistical (symmetric), followed by shape uncertainty (asymmetric) and correlated uncertainty (asymmetric).

R_CP (0-10%/60-80%) ratios of inclusive charged-particle jet distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV for R = 0.2, 0.3, and 0.4 for pTlead,min = 5 GeV/c. The first uncertainty is statistical (symmetric), followed by shape uncertainty (asymmetric) and correlated uncertainty (asymmetric). In addition, the systematic uncertainty for the T_AA normalization (30%) has to be added.

R_CP (0-10%/60-80%) ratios of inclusive charged-particle jet distributions in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV for R = 0.2 and 0.3 for pTlead,min = 5 GeV/c. The first uncertainty is statistical (symmetric), followed by shape uncertainty (asymmetric) and correlated uncertainty (asymmetric). In the paper are shown all these three uncertainty sources (statistical, shape, correlated) summed in quadrature. The systematic uncertainty for the T_AA normalization (30%) has not been included (as for the other measurements compared with the STAR data).

R_AA for peripheral (60-80%) Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV for R = 0.2, 0.3, and 0.4 for pTlead,min = 5 GeV/c. The first uncertainty is statistical (symmetric), followed by shape uncertainty (asymmetric) and correlated uncertainty (asymmetric). In addition, the systematic uncertainty for the T_AA normalization (29%) and PYTHIA reference (22%, 20%, 18% for R = 0.2, 0.3 and 0.4) have to be added.

R_AA for central (0-10%) Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV for R = 0.2, 0.3, and 0.4 for pTlead,min = 5 GeV/c. The first uncertainty is statistical (symmetric), followed by shape uncertainty (asymmetric) and correlated uncertainty (asymmetric). In addition, the systematic uncertainty for the T_AA normalization (7%) and PYTHIA reference (22%, 20%, 18% for R = 0.2, 0.3 and 0.4) have to be added. The unbiased data points are the 4 highest for R=0.2 and 3 highest for R=0.3 and 0.4, resp.

Ratio of inclusive charged-particle jet yields for R=0.2/R=0.4 for peripheral (60-80%) Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV for pTlead,min = 5 GeV/c (only unbiased region). The first uncertainty is statistical (symmetric), followed by shape uncertainty (asymmetric) and correlated uncertainty (asymmetric). Please note that in the paper, the uncertainties shown are the quadrature sums of the uncertainties listed in the table.

Ratio of inclusive charged-particle jet yields for R=0.2/R=0.4 for central (0-10%) Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV for pTlead,min = 5 GeV/c (only unbiased region). The first uncertainty is statistical (symmetric), followed by shape uncertainty (asymmetric) and correlated uncertainty (asymmetric). Please note that in the paper, the uncertainties shown are the quadrature sums of the uncertainties listed in the table.

The particle-level di-jet differential cross section. The systematic uncertainty on the data contains contributions from track finding efficiency, track transverse momentum resolution, calorimeter energy resolution, and unfolding uncertainties. For the theory, values are given for the underlying event and hadronization (UEH) correction uncertainty and the quadrature sum of the UEH and theoretical uncertainties. Both the UEH and theoretical uncertainties include contributions from factorization and renormalization scale uncertainties and PDF uncertainties. An 8.8% uncertainty common to all points due to the integrated luminosity determination is also present, but not included in the systematic values quoted below.

Values of gluon X1 and X2 obtained from the PYTHIA detector-level simulation for the same-sign di-jet topology compared to the gluon X distribution for inclusive jets. The inclusive distribution has been scaled down by a factor of 20 compared to the di-jet distributions.

Values of gluon X1 and X2 obtained from the PYTHIA detector-level simulation for the opposite-sign di-jet topology compared to the gluon X distribution for inclusive jets. The inclusive distribution has been scaled down by a factor of 20 compared to the di-jet distributions.

Di-jet A_LL asymmetry vs parton-level invariant mass for the same-sign di-jet topology. The systematic uncertainty on the mass includes contributions from jet energy scale, the correction to parton-level, and the difference between NLO and PYTHIA cross sections. The systematic uncertainty on the asymmetry includes contributions from trigger and reconstruction bias and residual transverse beam polarization components. A 6.5% uncertainty common to all points due to uncertainty on the measured beam polarizations is also present, but not included in the uncertainties quoted below.

Theoretical predictions for the di-jet A_LL asymmetry for the same-sign topology using the DSSV14 and NNPDFpol1.1 polarized PDF sets. The DSSV14 prediction is presented without uncertainty while the systematic uncertainty on the NNPDFpol1.1 prediction contains contributions from factorization and renormalization scale uncertainties and PDF uncertainties.

Di-jet A_LL asymmetry vs parton-level invariant mass for the opposite-sign di-jet topology. The systematic uncertainty on the mass includes contributions from jet energy scale, the correction to parton-level, and the difference between NLO and PYTHIA cross sections. The systematic uncertainty on the asymmetry includes contributions from trigger and reconstruction bias and residual transverse beam polarization components. A 6.5% uncertainty common to all points due to uncertainty on the measured beam polarizations is also present, but not included in the uncertainties quoted below.

Theoretical predictions for the di-jet A_LL asymmetry for the opposite-sign topology using the DSSV14 and NNPDFpol1.1 polarized PDF sets. The DSSV14 prediction is presented without uncertainty while the systematic uncertainty on the NNPDFpol1.1 prediction contains contributions from factorization and renormalization scale uncertainties and PDF uncertainties.

Inclusive jet $A_{LL}$ vs. parton jet $p_T$ for 0.5<|eta|<1.0.

The uncertainties on the parton jet pT values are strongly correlated across the bins. The point-to-point statistical and systematic uncertainties on the measured A_LL values given above are only weakly correlated among the bins. The correlation matrix for the quadrature sum of the point-to-point statistical and systematic uncertainties is given below. In that matrix, the order of the rows and columns matches the bin numbering above. In addition to the point-to-point statistical and systematic uncertainties, there are two systematic uncertainties that are common to all the measured A_LL values (and not included in the systematic uncertainty numbers quoted above): (a) +/-0.0005 vertical shift uncertainty from relative luminosity and (b) +/-6.5% vertical scale uncertainty from polarization.

$A_{LL}$ model predictions for |eta|<0.5.

$A_{LL}$ model predictions for 0.5<|eta|<1.0.