Fraction of bottom hadron decayed electrons in 0-80% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Fraction of bottom hadron decayed electrons in 0-20% and 20-40% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Fraction of bottom hadron decayed electrons in 40-80% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Nuclear modification factor $R_{\rm AA}$ of inclusive heavy flavor decayed electrons in 0-80% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV. The 8% global uncertainty from the $p$+$p$ reference and a 8% gloabl uncertainty from $N_{\rm coll.}$ are not included in the table values.

Nuclear modification factor $R_{\rm AA}$ of bottom- and charm-decay electrons in 0-80% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV. The 8% global uncertainty from the $p$+$p$ reference and a 8% gloabl uncertainty from $N_{\rm coll.}$ are not included in the table values.

Nuclear modification factor $R_{\rm AA}$ ratio of bottom- to charm-decay electrons in 0-80% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Null hypothesis for the nuclear modification factor $R_{\rm AA}$ ratio of bottom- to charm-decay electrons in 0-80% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Nuclear modification factor $R_{\rm CP}$ ratio of bottom- and charm-decay electrons in 0-80% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Null hypotheses for the nuclear modification factor $R_{\rm CP}$ ratio of bottom- and charm-decay electrons in 0-80% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

Parton dijet $M_{inv}$ vs $A_{LL}$ values with associated uncertainties, for topology C.

Parton dijet $M_{inv}$ vs $A_{LL}$ values with associated uncertainties, for topology D.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (statistical and systematics) for the inclusive jet measurements.The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (statistical and systematics) for the inclusive jet measurements coupling with the forward-forward dijet measurements (topology A). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (statistical and systematics) for the inclusive jet measurements coupling with the forward-forward dijet measurements (topology B). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (statistical and systematics) for the inclusive jet measurements coupling with the forward-forward dijet measurements (topology C). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (statistical and systematics) for the inclusive jet measurements coupling with the forward-forward dijet measurements (topology D). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) for forward-forward dijet measurements (topology A). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) coupling forward-forward dijet measurements (topology A) with forward-central dijet measurements (topology B). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) coupling forward-forward dijet measurements (topology A) with forward-central dijet measurements (topology C). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) coupling forward-forward dijet measurements (topology A) with forward-central dijet measurements (topology D). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) for forward-forward dijet measurements (topology B). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) coupling forward-forward dijet measurements (topology B) with forward-central dijet measurements (topology C). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) coupling forward-forward dijet measurements (topology B) with forward-central dijet measurements (topology D). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) for forward-forward dijet measurements (topology C). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) coupling forward-forward dijet measurements (topology C) with forward-central dijet measurements (topology D). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The correlation matrix for the point-to-point uncertainties (systematics only) for forward-forward dijet measurements (topology D). The relative luminosity and beam polarization uncertainties are not included because they are the same for all points.

The $p_{T}$ dependencies of $v_{1}$ within $-0.4<y<-0.1$ for $t$ in 10-40% mid-central Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

The rapidity and $p_{T}$ dependencies of $v_{1}$ for $^{3}$He in 10-40% mid-central Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

The $p_{T}$ dependencies of $v_{1}$ within $-0.1<y<0$ for $^4$He in 10-40% mid-central Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

The $p_{T}$ dependencies of $v_{1}$ within $-0.4<y<-0.1$ for $^{4}$He in 10-40% mid-central Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

The rapidity and $p_{T}$ dependencies of $v_{2}$ for $p$ in 10-40% mid-central Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

The rapidity and $p_{T}$ dependencies of $v_{2}$ for $d$ in 10-40% mid-central Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

The $p_{T}$ dependencies of $v_{2}$ within $-0.1<y<0$ for $t$ in 10-40% mid-central Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

The $p_{T}$ dependencies of $v_{2}$ within $-0.4<y<-0.1$ for $t$ in 10-40% mid-central Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

The rapidity and $p_{T}$ dependencies of $v_{2}$ for $^{3}$He in 10-40% mid-central Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

The $p_{T}$ dependencies of $v_{2}$ within $-0.1<y<0$ for $^4$He in 10-40% mid-central Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

The $p_{T}$ dependencies of $v_{2}$ within $-0.4<y<-0.1$ for $^{4}$He in 10-40% mid-central Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

The rapidity dependencies of $v_{1}$ for $p$, $d$, and $^{3}$He in 10-40% mid-central Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

The rapidity dependencies of $v_{1}$ for $t$ and $^{4}$He in 10-40% mid-central Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

The rapidity dependencies of $v_{1}$ from JAM plus coalescence calculations in 10-40% mid-central Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

The rapidity dependencies of $v_{2}$ for $p$, $d$, and $^{3}$He in 10-40% mid-central Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

The rapidity dependencies of $v_{2}$ for $t$ and $^{4}$He in 10-40% mid-central Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

The rapidity dependencies of $v_{2}$ from JAM plus coalescence calculations in 10-40% mid-central Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

Light nucleus scaled $v_{1}$ slopes as a function os collision energy in 10-40 mid-cantral Au+Au collisions.

Light nucleus scaled $v_{1}$ slopes from JAM plus coalescence in 10-40 mid-cantral Au+Au collisions at 3 GeV.

Directed flow for $\pi^{+}$ and $\pi^{-}$ versus rapidity for intermediate-centrality (10-40$\%$) Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200, 62.4, 39, 27, 19.6, 11.5 and 7.7 GeV. Errors are statistical only.

Directed flow slope $dv_{1}/dy$ of protons, antiprotons and $\pi^{\pm}$ near midrapidity versus beam energy for intermediate-centrality (10-40$\%$) Au+Au collisions.

Directed flow slope $dv_{1}/dy$ of net-protons near midrapidity versus beam energy for intermediate-centrality (10-40$\%$) Au+Au collisions. Datapoints for protons and antiprotons can be found in Table5.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected mean (M) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected mean (M) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected mean (M) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected mean (M) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected standard deviation ($\sigma$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected standard deviation ($\sigma$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected standard deviation ($\sigma$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected standard deviation ($\sigma$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected standard deviation ($\sigma$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected standard deviation ($\sigma$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected standard deviation ($\sigma$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected skewness ($S$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected skewness ($S$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected skewness ($S$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected skewness ($S$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected skewness ($S$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected skewness ($S$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected skewness ($S$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected kurtosis ($\kappa$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected kurtosis ($\kappa$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected kurtosis ($\kappa$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected kurtosis ($\kappa$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected kurtosis ($\kappa$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected kurtosis ($\kappa$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected kurtosis ($\kappa$) of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The dotted lines represent calculations from the central limit theorem. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $S\sigma$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $S\sigma$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $S\sigma$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $S\sigma$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $S\sigma$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $S\sigma$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $S\sigma$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\kappa\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\kappa\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\kappa\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\kappa\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\kappa\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\kappa\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 62.4 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\kappa\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of number of participating nucleons $N_{part}$ for Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. The error bars are statisticaland systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\sigma^2/M$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of collision energy for Au+Au collisions. The error bars are statistical and the caps represent systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $S\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of collision energy for Au+Au collisions. The error bars are statistical and the caps represent systematic errors.

The efficiency and centrality bin width corrected $\kappa\sigma^2$ of the net-charge multiplicity distributions as a function of collision energy for Au+Au collisions. The error bars are statistical and the caps represent systematic errors.

'Transverse spin transfer of $\Lambda$ in transversely polarized proton-proton collisions at 200 GeV.'

'Transverse spin transfer of $\bar{\Lambda}$ in transversely polarized proton-proton collisions at 200 GeV.'

'Transverse spin transfer $\Lambda$ in transversely polarized proton-proton collisions at 200 GeV.'

'Transverse spin transfer of $\bar{\Lambda}$ in transversely polarized proton-proton collisions at 200 GeV.'

The Azimuthal correlation functions of charged hadrons per trigger

The Azimuthal correlation functions of charged hadrons per trigger

The Azimuthal correlation functions of charged hadrons per trigger

The Azimuthal correlation functions of charged hadrons per trigger

The Azimuthal correlation functions of charged hadrons per trigger

pi0-hadron correlations, Away-side, AuAu

pi0-hadron correlations, Away-side, pp

pi0-hadron correlations, Near-side, AuAu

pi0-hadron correlations, Near-side, pp

Direct Photon-hadron correlations, Away-side, AuAu

Direct Photon-hadron correlations, Away-side, pp

Pi0-hadron correlations, Away-side, pp

Direct Photon-hadron correlations, Away-side, I_AA

Pi0-hadron correlations, Away-side, I_AA

Direct Photon-hadron correlations

Pi0-hadron correlations

Direct Photon-hadron correlations, Away-side, I_AA (pT^trig)

Direct Photon-hadron correlations, Away-side, I_AA (pT^assoc)

Jet-hadron correlations after background subtraction. Shown with Gaussian fits to jet peaks and systematic uncertanty bands Au+Au(4-6 GeV).

Gaussian widths of the awayside jet peaks in p+p(10-15 GeV).

Gaussian widths of the awayside jet peaks in Au+Au(10-15 GeV).

Gaussian widths of the awayside jet peaks in p+p(20-40 GeV).

Gaussian widths of the awayside jet peaks in Au+Au(20-40 GeV).

Awayside momentum difference(DAA) shown for 10-15 GeV.

Awayside momentum difference(DAA) shown for 10-15 GeV.

Directed flow slope at mid-rapidity, $dv_{1}/dy|_{y=0}$, as a function of beam energy in 10-40\% Au+Au collisions. Dots represent deuterons. Open squares are the published results in~\cite{Adamczyk_2018} for protons. The band denotes the results for deuterons from AMPT transport model. Statistical uncertainties (bars) and systematic uncertainties (horizontal lines) are shown separately. For visibility, the data points are staggered horizontally.

The $p_{T}$ dependence of $v_1/A$ in $|y|<0.6$ for protons (open squares) in 10-40\% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV. Statistical uncertainties (bars) and systematic uncertainties (horizontal lines) are shown separately.

The $d_{T}$ dependence of $v_1/A$ in $|y|<0.6$ for deuterons (solid circles) in 10-40\% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV. Statistical uncertainties (bars) and systematic uncertainties (horizontal lines) are shown separately.

The $p_{T}$ dependance of $v_{4}^{Inclusive}$, $v_{4}^{Linear}$, $v_{4}^{Mode-coupled}$, $\chi_{4,22}$ and $\rho_{4,22}$

The $p_{T}$ dependance of $v_{5}^{Inclusive}$, $v_{5}^{Linear}$, $v_{5}^{Mode-coupled}$, $\chi_{5,23}$ and $\rho_{5,23}$

Rapidity dependence of directed flow, v1(y), for positive pions with transverse momentum pT > 0.2 GeV/c and total momentum magnitude |p| < 1.6 GeV/c from events within 10-30% centrality. Here, the BBC-based Event Plane method is used. Plotted error bars are statistical only, and systematic errors are of comparable size.

The rapidity dependence of the directed flow for the Lambda using the TPC event plane for 10-30% centrality. Plotted error bars are statistical only, while systematic errors are +/- 0.007.

The rapidity dependence of the directed flow for the K0s using the TPC event plane for 10-30% centrality. Plotted error bars are statistical only, while systematic errors are +/- 0.017.

Beam energy dependence of the directed flow slope dv1=dy at midrapidity for baryons and mesons measured by STAR.

v2 scaled by the number of constituent quarks (nq) for charged pions and protons for 0-30% central collisions. The values of v2 scaled with nq for pions and protons are consistent with each other within errors. For comparison, points from E895 are also shown.

The excitation function v2 for all charged particles or separately for protons and pions, measured by several experiments. The STAR FXT points for protons and for pions are near the region where a change in slope occurs.

Excitation function of Rout, Rside, and Rlong.

Transverse mass dependence of Rout, Rside, and Rlong for three experiments: E895, STAR, and E866. The corresponding center-of-mass collision energies are 4.3 GeV, 4.5 GeV, and 4.9 GeV, respectively. Pairs for the STAR points are created from negative pion tracks in the momentum range 0.15 < pT < 0.8 GeV/c from events in the 0-15% centrality range.

The centrality dependence of Rout, Rside, and Rlong. Errors are statistical only. Here positive and negative pion pairs in the momentum range 0.15 < pT < 0.8 GeV/c are used.

Total $J/\psi$ efficiency as a function of cos$\theta$ for $2 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 3$ GeV/c

Total $J/\psi$ efficiency as a function of cos$\theta$ for $3 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 4$ GeV/c

Total $J/\psi$ efficiency as a function of cos$\theta$ for $4 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 6$ GeV/c

Different contributions to total $J/\psi$ efficiency as a function of cos$\theta$ for $2 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 3$ GeV/c

Different contributions to total $J/\psi$ efficiency as a function of cos$\theta$ for $3 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 4$ GeV/c

Different contributions to total $J/\psi$ efficiency as a function of cos$\theta$ for $4 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 6$ GeV/c

Corrected cos$\theta$ distribution for $2 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 3$ GeV/c

Corrected cos$\theta$ distribution for $3 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 4$ GeV/c

Corrected cos$\theta$ distribution for $4 < p_{T}^{J/\psi} < 6$ GeV/c

$J/\psi$ polarization parameter $\lambda_{\theta}$ as a function of $J/\psi$ $p_{T}$ for rapidity |y|<1

The dielectron $v_2$ as a function of $p_T$ in minimum-bias Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV for the $\eta$ mass region.

The dielectron $v_2$ as a function of $p_T$ in minimum-bias Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV for the charm + $ ho^0$ mass region.

The dielectron $v_2$ as a function of $p_T$ in minimum-bias Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV for the $\omega$ mass region.

The dielectron $v_2$ as a function of $p_T$ in minimum-bias Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV for the $\phi$ mass region.

The dielectron $v_2$ as a function of $p_T$ in minimum-bias Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV for the charm + thermal radiation mass region.

The dielectron $v_2$ as a function of $p_T$ in minimum-bias Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV expected from decays of a mesonic cocktail.

The dielectron $v_2$ as a function of $p_T$ in minimum-bias Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV expected from decays of a mesonic cocktail.

The dielectron $v_2$ as a function of $p_T$ in minimum-bias Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV expected from decays of a mesonic cocktail.

The dielectron $v_2$ as a function of $p_T$ in minimum-bias Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV expected from decays of a mesonic cocktail.

The dielectron $v_2$ as a function of $p_T$ in minimum-bias Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV expected from decays of a mesonic cocktail.

The dielectron $v_2$ as a function of $p_T$ in minimum-bias Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV expected from the $car{c}$ contribution.

The $p_T$-integrated dielectron $v_2$ as a function of $M_{ee}$ in minimum-bias Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

The $v_2$ of hadrons $\pi$, $K$, $p$, $\phi$ and $\Lambda$ in minimum-bias Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV for the $\pi^0$ mass region.

The $p_T$-integrated dielectron $v_2$ as a function of $M_{ee}$ in minimum-bias Au + Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, expected from the decays of $\pi^0$, $\eta$, $\omega$ and $\phi$ and from the $car{c}$ contribution.

e+ e− invariant mass spectrum from $\sqrt{s_{{NN}}}$ = 200 GeV Au + Au minimum bias (0%–80%) collisions compared to a hadronic cocktail simulation.

Mass spectrum of the excess (data minus cocktail) in the low mass region compared to model calculations. Green brackets depict the total systematic uncertainties including those from cocktails. Systematic errors are highly correlated across all data points.

Integrated dielectron yields in the mass regions of 0.30-0.76 (rho-like), 0.76-0.80 (omega-like), and 0.98-1.05 (phi-like) GeV/c^2 compared to hadronic cocktails within the STAR acceptance as a function of centrality.

Integrated dielectron yields in the mass regions of 0.30-0.76 (rho-like), 0.76-0.80 (omega-like), and 0.98-1.05 (phi-like) GeV/c^2 compared to hadronic cocktails within the STAR acceptance as a function of dielectron $p_T$.

Yields scaled by Npart for the rho-like region with cocktail subtracted, the omega-like and phi-like regions without subtraction as a function of Npart.

Dielectron mass spectra scaled with Npart from minimum bias (0%–80%) collisions.

Dielectron mass spectra scaled with Npart from central (0%–10%) collisions.

The ratio of Npart scaled dielectron yields between the central and minimum bias collisions.

Amplitude (A) as a function of centrality for Like Sign (LS) and Charge Independent (CI) particles for Au+Au collision at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The third harmonic coefficient as a function of pseudorapidity for 0-5% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The third harmonic coefficient as a function of pseudorapidity for 5-10% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The third harmonic coefficient as a function of pseudorapidity for 10-20% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The third harmonic coefficient as a function of pseudorapidity for 20-30% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The third harmonic coefficient as a function of pseudorapidity for 30-40% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The third harmonic coefficient as a function of pseudorapidity for 40-60% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The third harmonic coefficient as a function of transverse momentum for the wideGaussian method and for fhe event plane in the TPC for 0-5% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The third harmonic coefficient as a function of transverse momentum for the wideGaussian method and for fhe event plane in the TPC for 30-40% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The third harmonic coefficient as a function of transverse momentum for 0-10% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The third harmonic coefficient as a function of transverse momentum for 10-20% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The third harmonic coefficient as a function of transverse momentum for 20-30% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The third harmonic coefficient as a function of transverse momentum for 30-40% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The third harmonic coefficient as a function of transverse momentum for 40-50% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The third harmonic coefficient as a function of transverse momentum for 50-60% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The third harmonic coefficient as a function of centrality from different methods of analysis for Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The square of the third harmonic coefficient as a function of pseudorapidity separation (Deta) for Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The fourth power of the third harmonic coefficient from four-particle cumulants is plotted as a function of centrality for Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The ratio of the fourth power of the third harmonic coefficient from four-particle cumulants and the fourth power of the third harmonic flow is plotted as a function of centrality for Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The v_2{TPC} as a function of transverse momentum for 0-5% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The v_2{TPC} as a function of transverse momentum for 20-30% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The v_2{TPC} as a function of transverse momentum for 30-40% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The v_3{TPC} as a function of transverse momentum for 0-5% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The v_3{TPC} as a function of transverse momentum for 20-30% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

The v_3{TPC} as a function of transverse momentum for 30-40% centrality Au+Au collisions at sqrt(snn)=200 GEV.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

The correlation differences $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle=\delta\langle A^{2}_{UD}\rangle-\delta\langle A^{2}_{ LR}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle=\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}-\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}$ as a function of $p_{T}$. The data are from 20-40% central (upper) and 0-20% central (lower) Au+Au collisions.

The charge asymmetry correlations $\delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ (left panels) and $\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ (center panels), and correlation differences $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle=\delta\langle A^{2}_{ UD}\rangle-\delta\langle A^{2}_{ LR}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle=\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}-\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}$ (right panels), as a function of the azimuthal elliptic anisotropy of high-$p_{T}$ ($p_{T}>2$~GeV/$c$) particles (upper panels) and low-$p_{T}$ ($p_{T}<2$~GeV/$c$) particles (lower panels). Data are from 20-40% Au+Au collisions. The particle $p_{T}$ range of $0.15<p_{T}<2$~GeV/$c$ is used for both EP construction and asymmetry calculation.

The charge asymmetry correlations $\delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ (left panels) and $\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ (center panels), and correlation differences $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle=\delta\langle A^{2}_{ UD}\rangle-\delta\langle A^{2}_{ LR}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle=\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}-\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}$ (right panels), as a function of the azimuthal elliptic anisotropy of high-$p_{T}$ ($p_{T}>2$~GeV/$c$) particles (upper panels) and low-$p_{T}$ ($p_{T}<2$~GeV/$c$) particles (lower panels). Data are from 20-40% Au+Au collisions. The particle $p_{T}$ range of $0.15<p_{T}<2$~GeV/$c$ is used for both EP construction and asymmetry calculation.

The wedge size dependences of charge multiplicity asymmetry correlations (upper panel), and their differences between out-of-plane and in-plane, $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ (lower panel) for 20-40% central Au+Au collisions.

The wedge size dependences of charge multiplicity asymmetry correlations (upper panel), and their differences between out-of-plane and in-plane, $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ (lower panel) for 20-40% central Au+Au collisions.

Charge multiplicity asymmetry correlations as a function of the wedge location, $\phi_{ w}$, in 20-40% central Au+Au collisions. The wedge size is $30^{\circ}$. The curves are the characteristic $\cos(2\phi_{ w}$) to guide the eye.

The wedge size dependence of the difference between the same-sign and opposite-sign, $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle-\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$.

The values of $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle-\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$, scaled by $N_{part}$, as a function of the measured average elliptic anisotropy $<v^{obs}_{2}}>$ in Au+Au collisions. The centrality bin number is labeled by each data point, 0 for 70-80% up to 8 for 0-5%.

$\Delta=\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle-\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$, the event-by-event elliptical anisotropy of particle distributions relative to the second-harmonic event plane reconstructed from TPC tracks (left panel) and the first harmonic event plane reconstructed from the ZDC-SMD neutron signals (middle panel), in 20-40% central Au+Au collisions. Right panel: Average $\Delta$ for events with $|v^{obs}_{2}|<0.04$ relative to the TPC event plane as a function of centrality.

$\Delta=\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle-\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$, the event-by-event elliptical anisotropy of particle distributions relative to the second-harmonic event plane reconstructed from TPC tracks (left panel) and the first harmonic event plane reconstructed from the ZDC-SMD neutron signals (middle panel), in 20-40% central Au+Au collisions. Right panel: Average $\Delta$ for events with $|v^{obs}_{2}|<0.04$ relative to the TPC event plane as a function of centrality.

$\Delta=\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle-\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$, the event-by-event elliptical anisotropy of particle distributions relative to the second-harmonic event plane reconstructed from TPC tracks (left panel) and the first harmonic event plane reconstructed from the ZDC-SMD neutron signals (middle panel), in 20-40% central Au+Au collisions. Right panel: Average $\Delta$ for events with $|v^{obs}_{2}|<0.04$ relative to the TPC event plane as a function of centrality.

Left panel: $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ with a random EP in 20-40% Au+Au collisions. The lines depict the results with reconstructed EP lower right panel for comparison. Middle panel: The differences in $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ between the reconstructed EP and random EP results, respectively. Right panel: $\Delta=\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle-\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ with a random EP (open triangles).

Left panel: $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ with a random EP in 20-40% Au+Au collisions. The lines depict the results with reconstructed EP lower right panel for comparison. Middle panel: The differences in $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ between the reconstructed EP and random EP results, respectively. Right panel: $\Delta=\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle-\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ with a random EP (open triangles).

Left panel: $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ with a random EP in 20-40% Au+Au collisions. The lines depict the results with reconstructed EP lower right panel for comparison. Middle panel: The differences in $\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ and $\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ between the reconstructed EP and random EP results, respectively. Right panel: $\Delta=\Delta\langle A^{2}\rangle-\Delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ with a random EP (open triangles).

The correlation differences, $\langle A^{2}_{ LR}\rangle-\langle A^{2}_{ UD}\rangle$ and $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}-\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}$, scaled by the number of participants $(\pi/4)^2 N_{part}$. Also shown are $\langle \cos(\phi_{\alpha}+\phi_{\beta}-2\phi_{c})\rangle/v_{2,c} \approx \langle \cos(\phi_{\alpha}+\phi_{\beta}-2\psi_{ RP}) \rangle$ of same- and opposite-sign particle pairs ($\alpha$ and $\beta$) calculated from particles used for the charge asymmetry correlations with particle $c$ from those used for EP construction. The upper panel shows the default results where particles are divided according to $\eta$; the lower panel shows results with particles divided randomly into two halves and compared to published correlators.

The correlation differences, $\langle A^{2}_{ LR}\rangle-\langle A^{2}_{ UD}\rangle$ and $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}-\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}$, scaled by the number of participants $(\pi/4)^2 N_{part}$. Also shown are $\langle \cos(\phi_{\alpha}+\phi_{\beta}-2\phi_{c})\rangle/v_{2,c} \approx \langle \cos(\phi_{\alpha}+\phi_{\beta}-2\psi_{ RP}) \rangle$ of same- and opposite-sign particle pairs ($\alpha$ and $\beta$) calculated from particles used for the charge asymmetry correlations with particle $c$ from those used for EP construction. The upper panel shows the default results where particles are divided according to $\eta$; the lower panel shows results with particles divided randomly into two halves and compared to published correlators.

Upper panel: Positively charged particle multiplicity distributions versus the azimuthal angle, $\phi$, in 30-40% central Au+Au collisions. The data are shown separately for $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$. The magnetic polarities of the STAR magnet have been summed and the $p_{T}$ is integrated over the range $0.15<p_{T}<2$~GeV/$c$. The inverse of these distributions, properly normalized, were used to correct for the track efficiency versus $\phi$. Lower panel: Reconstructed event-plane azimuthal angle distributions in 30-40% central Au+Au collisions. Particles within $0.15 < p_{T} < 2$~GeV/$c$ from $\eta<0$ and $\eta>0$ were used separately to reconstruct the EP.

Upper panel: Positively charged particle multiplicity distributions versus the azimuthal angle, $\phi$, in 30-40% central Au+Au collisions. The data are shown separately for $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$. The magnetic polarities of the STAR magnet have been summed and the $p_{T}$ is integrated over the range $0.15<p_{T}<2$~GeV/$c$. The inverse of these distributions, properly normalized, were used to correct for the track efficiency versus $\phi$. Lower panel: Reconstructed event-plane azimuthal angle distributions in 30-40% central Au+Au collisions. Particles within $0.15 < p_{T} < 2$~GeV/$c$ from $\eta<0$ and $\eta>0$ were used separately to reconstruct the EP.

The relative charge asymmetry correlations, $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}/\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}$, as a function of the number of participants, $N_{part}$, for four combinations of $\eta$ ranges used for EP reconstruction and asymmetry calculation.

The asymmetry correlations, $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, before and after the corrections for the $\phi$-dependent acceptance $\times$ efficiency. The colored curves are the corresponding statistical fluctuations and detector effects. The results are separated for $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$. Only $\eta>0$ is shown for $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ and $\eta<0$ for $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ for clarity.

The asymmetry correlations, $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, before and after the corrections for the $\phi$-dependent acceptance $\times$ efficiency. The colored curves are the corresponding statistical fluctuations and detector effects. The results are separated for $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$. Only $\eta>0$ is shown for $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ and $\eta<0$ for $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ for clarity.

The asymmetry correlations, $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, before and after the corrections for the $\phi$-dependent acceptance $\times$ efficiency. The colored curves are the corresponding statistical fluctuations and detector effects. The results are separated for $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$. Only $\eta>0$ is shown for $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ and $\eta<0$ for $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ for clarity.

Left panel: Statistical fluctuation and detector effects in the charge asymmetry variance (multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$) from the $\eta<0$ region. The dotted curve shows the $1/N$ approximation, the dashed curve shows the statistical fluctuations $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat}}\rangle$ obtained by the (50-50) method (see the text). The solid curve connecting the solid points shows the net effect of the statistical fluctuations and detector non-uniformities, $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$, obtained by the adding-$\pi$ method, and the crosses shows the same but obtained from the ``scramble'' method. See the text for details. Middle panel: The statistical fluctuation effects relative to the $1/N$ approximation (thin curves) and the effects due to the imperfect detector (thick curves). The dashed curves are for the region $\eta>0$ and the solid curves are for $\eta<0$. Right panel: The ratios of the statistical fluctuation and detector effects $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle/\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$ and $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD,stat+det}}\rangle/\langle A^{2}_{+,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$, separately for the $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$ regions. The $\phi$-acceptance correction was applied for the results in this figure.

Left panel: Statistical fluctuation and detector effects in the charge asymmetry variance (multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$) from the $\eta<0$ region. The dotted curve shows the $1/N$ approximation, the dashed curve shows the statistical fluctuations $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat}}\rangle$ obtained by the (50-50) method (see the text). The solid curve connecting the solid points shows the net effect of the statistical fluctuations and detector non-uniformities, $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$, obtained by the adding-$\pi$ method, and the crosses shows the same but obtained from the ``scramble'' method. See the text for details. Middle panel: The statistical fluctuation effects relative to the $1/N$ approximation (thin curves) and the effects due to the imperfect detector (thick curves). The dashed curves are for the region $\eta>0$ and the solid curves are for $\eta<0$. Right panel: The ratios of the statistical fluctuation and detector effects $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle/\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$ and $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD,stat+det}}\rangle/\langle A^{2}_{+,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$, separately for the $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$ regions. The $\phi$-acceptance correction was applied for the results in this figure.

Left panel: Statistical fluctuation and detector effects in the charge asymmetry variance (multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$) from the $\eta<0$ region. The dotted curve shows the $1/N$ approximation, the dashed curve shows the statistical fluctuations $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat}}\rangle$ obtained by the (50-50) method (see the text). The solid curve connecting the solid points shows the net effect of the statistical fluctuations and detector non-uniformities, $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$, obtained by the adding-$\pi$ method, and the crosses shows the same but obtained from the ``scramble'' method. See the text for details. Middle panel: The statistical fluctuation effects relative to the $1/N$ approximation (thin curves) and the effects due to the imperfect detector (thick curves). The dashed curves are for the region $\eta>0$ and the solid curves are for $\eta<0$. Right panel: The ratios of the statistical fluctuation and detector effects $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle/\langle A^{2}_{-,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$ and $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD,stat+det}}\rangle/\langle A^{2}_{+,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$, separately for the $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$ regions. The $\phi$-acceptance correction was applied for the results in this figure.

The asymmetry correlations, $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, separately for $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$. The star and triangle depict the results from $d$+Au collisions. The net effects of the statistical fluctuations and detector non-uniformities are shown as the curves.

The asymmetry correlations, $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, separately for $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$. The star and triangle depict the results from $d$+Au collisions. The net effects of the statistical fluctuations and detector non-uniformities are shown as the curves.

The asymmetry correlations, $\langle A^{2}_{+,{ UD}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\langle A^{2}_{-,{ UD}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ UD}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, separately for $\eta>0$ and $\eta<0$. The star and triangle depict the results from $d$+Au collisions. The net effects of the statistical fluctuations and detector non-uniformities are shown as the curves.

The statistical and detector effect subtracted asymmetry correlations, $\delta\langle A^{2}_{+,0^{\circ}\pm\Delta\phi_{w}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\delta\langle A^{2}_{-,0^{\circ}\pm\Delta\phi_{w}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, before and after the corrections for the $\phi$-dependent acceptance $\times$ efficiency.

The statistical and detector effect subtracted asymmetry correlations, $\delta\langle A^{2}_{+,0^{\circ}\pm\Delta\phi_{w}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\delta\langle A^{2}_{-,0^{\circ}\pm\Delta\phi_{w}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, before and after the corrections for the $\phi$-dependent acceptance $\times$ efficiency.

The statistical and detector effect subtracted asymmetry correlations, $\delta\langle A^{2}_{+,0^{\circ}\pm\Delta\phi_{w}}\rangle$ (left panel), $\delta\langle A^{2}_{-,0^{\circ}\pm\Delta\phi_{w}}\rangle$ (middle panel), and $\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle_{ LR}$ (right panel), multiplied by the number of participants $N_{part}$, before and after the corrections for the $\phi$-dependent acceptance $\times$ efficiency.

Dynamical charge asymmetry variance after removing the statistical and detector effects, $\delta\langle A^{2}_{\pm,{ LR}}\rangle=\langle A^{2}_{\pm,{ LR}}\rangle-\langle A^{2}_{\pm,{ LR,stat+det}}\rangle$, scaled by the number of participants $N_{part}$. The results are consistent between positive and negative $\eta$ regions and between positive and negative charges.

The second-harmonic event-plane resolution of sub-events ($\eta<0$ and $\eta>0$) as a function of the number of participants.

Charge multiplicity asymmetry correlations, $\delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ (left panel) and $\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ (middle panel), and their differences between UD\ and LR\ (right panel) as a function of the event-plane resolution $\epsilon_{ EP}(f)=\sqrt{\mean{\cos2(\psi_{{ EP},\eta>0}(f)-\psi_{{ EP},\eta<0}(f))}}$ in 20-30% central Au+Au collisions. The solid lines are free linear fits to the data, while the dashed lines are linear fits with the intercept fixed to zero at $\epsilon_{ EP}(f)=0$.

Charge multiplicity asymmetry correlations, $\delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ (left panel) and $\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ (middle panel), and their differences between UD\ and LR\ (right panel) as a function of the event-plane resolution $\epsilon_{ EP}(f)=\sqrt{\mean{\cos2(\psi_{{ EP},\eta>0}(f)-\psi_{{ EP},\eta<0}(f))}}$ in 20-30% central Au+Au collisions. The solid lines are free linear fits to the data, while the dashed lines are linear fits with the intercept fixed to zero at $\epsilon_{ EP}(f)=0$.

TCharge multiplicity asymmetry correlations, $\delta\langle A^{2}\rangle$ (left panel) and $\delta\langle A_{+}A_{-}\rangle$ (middle panel), and their differences between UD\ and LR\ (right panel) as a function of the event-plane resolution $\epsilon_{ EP}(f)=\sqrt{\mean{\cos2(\psi_{{ EP},\eta>0}(f)-\psi_{{ EP},\eta<0}(f))}}$ in 20-30% central Au+Au collisions. The solid lines are free linear fits to the data, while the dashed lines are linear fits with the intercept fixed to zero at $\epsilon_{ EP}(f)=0$.

The TPC second-harmonic (upper left) and ZDC-SMD first harmonic (upper right) event-plane resolution as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ in 20-40% central Au+Au collisions. The TPC second-harmonic (lower left) and ZDC-SMD first harmonic (lower right) event-plane resolution for events with $|v^{obs}_{2}|<0.04$ as a function of centrality.

The TPC second-harmonic (upper left) and ZDC-SMD first harmonic (upper right) event-plane resolution as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ in 20-40% central Au+Au collisions. The TPC second-harmonic (lower left) and ZDC-SMD first harmonic (lower right) event-plane resolution for events with $|v^{obs}_{2}|<0.04$ as a function of centrality.

The TPC second-harmonic (upper left) and ZDC-SMD first harmonic (upper right) event-plane resolution as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ in 20-40% central Au+Au collisions. The TPC second-harmonic (lower left) and ZDC-SMD first harmonic (lower right) event-plane resolution for events with $|v^{obs}_{2}|<0.04$ as a function of centrality.

The TPC second-harmonic (upper left) and ZDC-SMD first harmonic (upper right) event-plane resolution as a function of $v^{obs}_{2}$ in 20-40% central Au+Au collisions. The TPC second-harmonic (lower left) and ZDC-SMD first harmonic (lower right) event-plane resolution for events with $|v^{obs}_{2}|<0.04$ as a function of centrality.

Sample fit projections onto the $q_{out}$, $q_{side}$, and $q_{long}$ axes respectively for four angular bins relative to the reaction. These projections are from results for 10-20% central, 19.6 GeV Au+Au collisions with 0.15 < $k_T$ < 0.6 GeV/c.

Energy dependence of the HBT parameters for central Au+Au, Pb+Pb, and Pb+Au collisions at mid-rapidity and $\langle k_T \rangle \approx 0.22$ GeV/c. Errors on NA44, NA49, WA98, and CERES, points include systematic errors.The systematic errors for STAR points at all energies (from Table II) are of similar size to error bar for 39 GeV, shown as a representative example. Errors on other results are statistical only, to emphasize the trend.

The $\langle m_T \rangle$ dependence of $R_{out}$, $R_{side}$ and $R_{long}$ for all energies at 0-5% centrality. Errors are statistical only. These plot shows the difference (between $R_{out}$ and $R_{side}$) and the ratio $R_{out}$ / $R_{side}$ respectively.

The $\langle m_T \rangle$ dependence of $R_{out}$, $R_{side}$ and $R_{long}$ for each energy and multiple centralities. Errors are statistical only.

The dependence of the HBT radii on multiplicity,$\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta \rangle^{1/3}$, for $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c and$k_T\approx 0.39$ GeV/c. Results are for Au+Au collisions at STAR at 7 GeV. Errors are statistical only.

The dependence of the HBT radii on multiplicity,$\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta \rangle^{1/3}$, for $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c and$k_T\approx 0.39$ GeV/c. Results are for Au+Au collisions at STAR at 11.5 GeV. Errors are statistical only.

The dependence of the HBT radii on multiplicity,$\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta \rangle^{1/3}$, for $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c and$k_T\approx 0.39$ GeV/c. Results are for Au+Au collisions at STAR at 19.6 GeV. Errors are statistical only.

The dependence of the HBT radii on multiplicity,$\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta \rangle^{1/3}$, for $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c and$k_T\approx 0.39$ GeV/c. Results are for Au+Au collisions at STAR at 27 GeV. Errors are statistical only.

The dependence of the HBT radii on multiplicity,$\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta \rangle^{1/3}$, for $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c and$k_T\approx 0.39$ GeV/c. Results are for Au+Au collisions at STAR at 39 GeV. Errors are statistical only.

The dependence of the HBT radii on multiplicity,$\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta \rangle^{1/3}$, for $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c and$k_T\approx 0.39$ GeV/c. Results are for Au+Au collisions at STAR at 62.4 GeV. Errors are statistical only.

The dependence of the HBT radii on multiplicity,$\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta \rangle^{1/3}$, for $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c and$k_T\approx 0.39$ GeV/c. Results are for Au+Au collisions at STAR at 200 GeV. Errors are statistical only.

The dependence of the HBT radii on multiplicity,$\langle dN_{ch}/d\eta \rangle^{1/3}$, for $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c and$k_T\approx 0.39$ GeV/c. Results are for Si+Al collisions at E802, Pb+Au at CERES, Pb+Pb at ALICE. Errors are statistical only.

The beam energy dependence of the volume of the regions of homogeneity at kinetic freeze-out in central Au+Au, Pb+Pb and Pb+Au collisions with $k_T\approx 0.22$ GeV/c.

The lifetime, $\tau$, of the system as a function of beam energy for central Au+Au collisions assuming a temperature of T = 0.12 GeV at kinetic freeze-out.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 7.7 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c for the azimuthally integrated radii and the 0th-order Fourier coefficients. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 7.7 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c, from the HHLW method (Gaussian fits to each angular bin) and a single global fit to all angular bins to directly. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at backward(−1<y<−0.5), forward(0.5<y<1)and mid(−0.5<y< 0.5) rapidity, in 7.7 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c using the global fit method. Error bars include only statistical uncertain- ties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 11.5 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c for the azimuthally integrated radii and the 0th-order Fourier coefficients. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 11.5 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c, from the HHLW method (Gaussian fits to each angular bin) and a single global fit to all angular bins to directly. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at backward(−1<y<−0.5), forward(0.5<y<1) and mid(−0.5<y< 0.5) rapidity, in 11.5 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c using the global fit method. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 19.6 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c for the azimuthally integrated radii and the 0th-order Fourier coefficients. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 19.6 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c, from the HHLW method (Gaussian fits to each angular bin) and a single global fit to all angular bins to directly. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at backward(−1<y<−0.5), forward(0.5<y<1) and mid(−0.5<y< 0.5) rapidity, in 19.6 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c using the global fit method. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 27 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c for the azimuthally integrated radii and the 0th-order Fourier coefficients. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 27 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c, from the HHLW method (Gaussian fits to each angular bin) and a single global fit to all angular bins to directly. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at backward(−1<y<−0.5), forward(0.5<y<1) and mid(−0.5<y< 0.5) rapidity, in 27 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c using the global fit method. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 39 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c for the azimuthally integrated radii and the 0th-order Fourier coefficients. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 39 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c, from the HHLW method (Gaussian fits to each angular bin) and a single global fit to all angular bins to directly. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at backward(−1<y<−0.5), forward(0.5<y<1) and mid(−0.5<y< 0.5) rapidity, in 39 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c using the global fit method. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 62.4 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c for the azimuthally integrated radii and the 0th-order Fourier coefficients. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 62.4 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c, from the HHLW method (Gaussian fits to each angular bin) and a single global fit to all angular bins to directly. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at backward(−1<y<−0.5), forward(0.5<y<1) and mid(−0.5<y< 0.5) rapidity, in 62.4 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c using the global fit method. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 200 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c for the azimuthally integrated radii and the 0th-order Fourier coefficients. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at mid-rapidity (−0.5 < y < 0.5), in 200 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c, from the HHLW method (Gaussian fits to each angular bin) and a single global fit to all angular bins to directly. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Centrality dependence of the Fourier coefficients that describe azimuthal oscillations of the HBT radii, at backward(−1<y<−0.5), forward(0.5<y<1) and mid(−0.5<y< 0.5) rapidity, in 200 GeV collisions with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c using the global fit method. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties.

Beam energy dependence of the $R_{ol,0}^2$ cross term for forward and backward rapidity with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c.

The eccentricity of the collisions at kinetic freez-out, εF , as a function of initial eccentricity relative to the participant plane, ε$_{PP}$, at mid-rapidity. All results are for ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties. The line has a slope of one indicating no change in shape.

The dependence of the kinetic freeze-out eccentricity of pions on collision energy in mid-central Au+Au collisions (E895, STAR) and Pb+Au collisions (CERES) for three rapidity regions and with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c. Several (2+1)D hydrodynamical models and UrQMD calculations are shown. Model centralities correspond to the data.

The dependence of the kinetic freeze-out eccentricity of pions on collision energy in mid-central Au+Au collisions using UrQMD calculations, (2+1)D hydro MC-KLN and (2+1)D hydro MC-GLB models with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties. Model centralities correspond to the data.

The dependence of the kinetic freeze-out eccentricity of pions on collision energy in mid-central Au+Au collisions using (2+1)D hydro EOS-Q, (2+1)D hydro EOS-H, and (2+1)D hydro EOS-I models with ⟨$k_T$⟩ ≈ 0.31 GeV/c. Error bars include only statistical uncertainties. Model centralities correspond to the data.

The invariant yield versus transverse momentum for |y| < 1 in 0-60% centrality in Au+Au collisions (solid circles). The results are compared to high-$p_T$ (3 < $p_T$ < 10 GeV/c) results from STAR [9] (solid squares) and PHENIX data [8] (open squares). Also shown is the yield in 0-60% centrality Cu+Cu collisions for low $p_T$ (solid triangles) and high $p_T$ [48] (open triangles). The models are described in the text [49, 50]. The $J/\psi$ cross section in p+p collisions is also shown at STAR (stars) and PHENIX [51] (diamonds), and the scale is indicated on the right axis.

The $J/\psi$ nuclear modification factor versus transverse momentum for |y| < 1 and $p_T$ < 5 GeV/c for 0-60% centrality Au+Au collisions (solid circles). The data are compared with STAR high-$p_T$ (5 < $p_T$ < 10 GeV/c) results [9] and PHENIX results [8] in |y| < 0.35 (open squares). The statistical and systematic uncertainties on the baseline $J/\psi$ cross section in p+p collisions are indicated by the hatched and solid bands, respectively. Boxes on the vertical axes represent the uncertainty on $N_{coll}$ combined with the uncertainty on the inelastic cross section in p+p collisions

The $J/\psi$ nuclear modification factor versus transverse momentum for |y| < 1 and $p_T$ < 5 GeV/c for 0-20% centrality Au+Au collisions (solid circles). The data are compared with STAR high-$p_T$ (5 < $p_T$ < 10 GeV/c) results [9] and PHENIX results [8] in |y| < 0.35 (open squares). The statistical and systematic uncertainties on the baseline $J/\psi$ cross section in p+p collisions are indicated by the hatched and solid bands, respectively. Boxes on the vertical axes represent the uncertainty on $N_{coll}$ combined with the uncertainty on the inelastic cross section in p+p collisions

The $J/\psi$ nuclear modification factor versus transverse momentum for |y| < 1 and $p_T$ < 5 GeV/c for 20-40% centrality Au+Au collisions (solid circles). The data are compared with STAR high-$p_T$ (5 < $p_T$ < 10 GeV/c) results [9] and PHENIX results [8] in |y| < 0.35 (open squares). The statistical and systematic uncertainties on the baseline $J/\psi$ cross section in p+p collisions are indicated by the hatched and solid bands, respectively. Boxes on the vertical axes represent the uncertainty on $N_{coll}$ combined with the uncertainty on the inelastic cross section in p+p collisions

The $J/\psi$ nuclear modification factor versus transverse momentum for |y| < 1 and $p_T$ < 5 GeV/c for 40-60% centrality Au+Au collisions (solid circles). The data are compared with STAR high-$p_T$ (5 < $p_T$ < 10 GeV/c) results [9] and PHENIX results [8] in |y| < 0.35 (open squares). The statistical and systematic uncertainties on the baseline $J/\psi$ cross section in p+p collisions are indicated by the hatched and solid bands, respectively. Boxes on the vertical axes represent the uncertainty on $N_{coll}$ combined with the uncertainty on the inelastic cross section in p+p collisions

The $J/\psi$ invariant yield and nuclear modification factor as a function of centrality for |y| < 1 in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

The $J/\psi$ invariant yield $Bd^2N/(2\pi p_Tdydp_T) [(GeV/c)^{-2}]$ and nuclear modification factor as a function of transverse momentum for |y| < 1 in Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

The $J/\psi$ invariant yield and nuclear modification factor for |y| < 1 in Cu+Cu collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV.

(Color online) Modulated sign correlations (msc) compared to the three-point correlator versus centrality for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$= 200 GeV. Shown with triangles is the msc, Eq. 5. The systematic uncertainties will be shown in detail in Fig. 7. Diamonds and circles show the three-point correlator, Eq. 1, and the grey bars reflect the conditions of $\Delta p_{T}$ > 0.15 GeV/c and $\Delta\eta$ > 0.15 applied to the three-point correlator, to be discussed in the text. For comparison, the model calculation of THERMINATOR [21] is also shown.

(Color online) The msc split into 2 composite parts versus centrality for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$= 200 GeV. Shaded areas represent the systematic uncertainty due to the event plane determination. For comparison with the $\Delta$msc term, we also put $−\nu_{2}/N$ and the model calculation of MEVSIM [24], to be described in the text.

(Color online) The msc split into 2 composite parts versus centrality for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$= 200 GeV. Shaded areas represent the systematic uncertainty due to the event plane determination. For comparison with the $\Delta$msc term, we also put $−\nu_{2}/N$ and the model calculation of MEVSIM [24], to be described in the text.

(Color online) Three-point correlations split up into out-of-plane $(\langle sin(\Delta\phi_{\alpha}) sin(\Delta\phi_{\beta})\rangle)$ and in-plane $(\langle cos(\Delta\phi_{\alpha}) cos(\Delta\phi_{\beta})\rangle)$ composite parts for 40 − 60% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ GeV. (a)shows the correlations versus $\langle\eta\rangle$ = $(\eta_{\alpha}+\eta_{\beta})/2$. (b) shows the correlations versus $|\Delta\eta|$ = $|\eta_{\alpha}-\eta_{\beta}|$. Statistical errors are smaller than the symbol size. Systematic errors are given by the shaded bands and apply only to the difference of in-plane and out-of-plane parts.

(Color online) Three-point correlations split up into out-of-plane $(\langle sin(\Delta\phi_{\alpha}) sin(\Delta\phi_{\beta})\rangle)$ and in-plane $(\langle cos(\Delta\phi_{\alpha}) cos(\Delta\phi_{\beta})\rangle)$ composite parts for 40 − 60% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ GeV. (a)shows the correlations versus $\langle\eta\rangle$ = $(\eta_{\alpha}+\eta_{\beta})/2$. (b) shows the correlations versus $|\Delta\eta|$ = $|\eta_{\alpha}-\eta_{\beta}|$. Statistical errors are smaller than the symbol size. Systematic errors are given by the shaded bands and apply only to the difference of in-plane and out-of-plane parts.

(Color online) Three-point correlations split up into out-of-plane and in-plane composite parts for 40 − 60% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$= 200 GeV. (a) shows the correlatios versus $\langle p_{T}\rangle$ = $(p_{T,\alpha}+p_{T,\beta})/2$. (b) shows the correlations versus $|\Delta p_{T}|$ = $|p_{T,\alpha}-p_{T,\beta}|$. Statistical errors are smaller than the symbol size. Systematic errors are given by the shaded bands and apply only to the difference of in-plane and out-of-plane parts.

(Color online) Three-point correlations split up into out-of-plane and in-plane composite parts for 40 − 60% Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$= 200 GeV. (a) shows the correlatios versus $\langle p_{T}\rangle$ = $(p_{T,\alpha}+p_{T,\beta})/2$. (b) shows the correlations versus $|\Delta p_{T}|$ = $|p_{T,\alpha}-p_{T,\beta}|$. Statistical errors are smaller than the symbol size. Systematic errors are given by the shaded bands and apply only to the difference of in-plane and out-of-plane parts.

Transverse mass dependence of Gaussian radii Rout, Rside and Rlong and of experimental values of the Gaussian fit parameter lambda for midrapidity kaon pairs from the 30% most central Au+Au collisions at sqrt(sNN)=200 GeV. The PHENIX datapoints of the plot in the paper are from Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 142301 (2009).

Centrality dependence of $\Lambda$ global polarization in Au+Au collisions at 200 GeV. Note that the results from previous measurement are rescaled using updated decay parameters (PDG2020), $\alpha_{\Lambda}$=0.732. The original data can be found in <a href="https://www.hepdata.net/record/ins1672785">this page</a>.

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.