Showing 10 of 48 results
Measurements of inclusive jet suppression in heavy ion collisions at the LHC provide direct sensitivity to the physics of jet quenching. In a sample of lead-lead collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 2.76 TeV corresponding to an integrated luminosity of approximately 7 inverse microbarns, ATLAS has measured jets with a calorimeter over the pseudorapidity interval |$\eta$| < 2.1 and over the transverse momentum range 38 < pT < 210 GeV. Jets were reconstructed using the anti-$k_t$ algorithm with values for the distance parameter that determines the nominal jet radius of R = 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5. The centrality dependence of the jet yield is characterized by the jet "central-to-peripheral ratio," $R_{cp}$. Jet production is found to be suppressed by approximately a factor of two in the 10% most central collisions relative to peripheral collisions. $R_{cp}$ varies smoothly with centrality as characterized by the number of participating nucleons. The observed suppression is only weakly dependent on jet radius and transverse momentum. These results provide the first direct measurement of inclusive jet suppression in heavy ion collisions and complement previous measurements of dijet transverse energy imbalance at the LHC.
Glauber model calculation of the mean numbers of Npart and its associated errors, the mean Ncoll ratios, and Rcoll with fractional errors as a function of the centrality bins.
The Rcp values as a function of jet PT for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the collision centrality in the range 0 - 10 %.
The Rcp values as a function of jet PT for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the collision centrality in the range 10 - 20 %.
The Rcp values as a function of jet PT for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the collision centrality in the range 20 - 30 %.
The Rcp values as a function of jet PT for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the collision centrality in the range 30 - 40 %.
The Rcp values as a function of jet PT for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the collision centrality in the range 40 - 50 %.
The Rcp values as a function of jet PT for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the collision centrality in the range 50 - 60 %.
The Rcp values as a function of the mean number of participating nucleons, NPART, for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the jet PT range 38.36 - 44.21 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of the mean number of participating nucleons, NPART, for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the jet PT range 44.21 - 50.94 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of the mean number of participating nucleons, NPART, for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the jet PT range 50.94 - 58.70 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of the mean number of participating nucleons, NPART, for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the jet PT range 58.70 - 67.64 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of the mean number of participating nucleons, NPART, for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the jet PT range 67.64 - 77.94 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of the mean number of participating nucleons, NPART, for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the jet PT range 77.94 - 89.81 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of the mean number of participating nucleons, NPART, for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the jet PT range 89.81 - 103.5 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of the mean number of participating nucleons, NPART, for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the jet PT range 103.5 - 119.3 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of the mean number of participating nucleons, NPART, for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the jet PT range 119.3 - 137.4 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of the mean number of participating nucleons, NPART, for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the jet PT range 137.4 - 158.3 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of the mean number of participating nucleons, NPART, for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the jet PT range 158.3 - 182.5 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of the mean number of participating nucleons, NPART, for the four R values, 0.2, 0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 for the jet PT range 182.5 - 210.3 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 0 - 10 %, 10 - 20 % and 20 - 30 % for the jet PT range 38.36 - 44.21 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 30 - 40 %, 40 - 50 % and 50 - 60 % for the jet PT range 38.36 - 44.21 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 0 - 10 %, 10 - 20 % and 20 - 30 % for the jet PT range 44.21 - 50.94 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 30 - 40 %, 40 - 50 % and 50 - 60 % for the jet PT range 44.21 - 50.94 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 0 - 10 %, 10 - 20 % and 20 - 30 % for the jet PT range 50.94 - 58.70 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 30 - 40 %, 40 - 50 % and 50 - 60 % for the jet PT range 50.94 - 58.70 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 0 - 10 %, 10 - 20 % and 20 - 30 % for the jet PT range 58.70 - 67.64 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 30 - 40 %, 40 - 50 % and 50 - 60 % for the jet PT range 58.70 - 67.64 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 0 - 10 %, 10 - 20 % and 20 - 30 % for the jet PT range 67.64 - 77.94 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 30 - 40 %, 40 - 50 % and 50 - 60 % for the jet PT range 67.64 - 77.94 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 0 - 10 %, 10 - 20 % and 20 - 30 % for the jet PT range 77.94 - 89.81 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 30 - 40 %, 40 - 50 % and 50 - 60 % for the jet PT range 77.94 - 89.81 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 0 - 10 %, 10 - 20 % and 20 - 30 % for the jet PT range 89.81 - 103.5 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 30 - 40 %, 40 - 50 % and 50 - 60 % for the jet PT range 89.81 - 103.5 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 0 - 10 %, 10 - 20 % and 20 - 30 % for the jet PT range 103.5 - 119.3 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 30 - 40 %, 40 - 50 % and 50 - 60 % for the jet PT range 103.5 - 119.3 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 0 - 10 %, 10 - 20 % and 20 - 30 % for the jet PT range 119.3 - 137.4 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 30 - 40 %, 40 - 50 % and 50 - 60 % for the jet PT range 119.3 - 137.4 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 0 - 10 %, 10 - 20 % and 20 - 30 % for the jet PT range 137.4 - 158.3 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 30 - 40 %, 40 - 50 % and 50 - 60 % for the jet PT range 137.4 - 158.3 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 0 - 10 %, 10 - 20 % and 20 - 30 % for the jet PT range 158.3 - 182.5 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 30 - 40 %, 40 - 50 % and 50 - 60 % for the jet PT range 158.3 - 182.5 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 0 - 10 %, 10 - 20 % and 20 - 30 % for the jet PT range 182.5 - 210.3 GeV.
The Rcp values as a function of R for the three centrality ranges 30 - 40 %, 40 - 50 % and 50 - 60 % for the jet PT range 182.5 - 210.3 GeV.
The ratios of Rcp between R=0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 and R=0.2 jets as a function of the jet PT for the centrality range 0 - 10 %.
The ratios of Rcp between R=0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 and R=0.2 jets as a function of the jet PT for the centrality range 10 - 20 %.
The ratios of Rcp between R=0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 and R=0.2 jets as a function of the jet PT for the centrality range 20 - 30 %.
The ratios of Rcp between R=0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 and R=0.2 jets as a function of the jet PT for the centrality range 30 - 40 %.
The ratios of Rcp between R=0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 and R=0.2 jets as a function of the jet PT for the centrality range 40 - 50 %.
The ratios of Rcp between R=0.3, 0.4 and 0.5 and R=0.2 jets as a function of the jet PT for the centrality range 50 - 60 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.2 and centrality range 0 - 10 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.3 and centrality range 0 - 10 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.4 and centrality range 0 - 10 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.5 and centrality range 0 - 10 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.2 and centrality range 10 - 20 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.3 and centrality range 10 - 20 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.4 and centrality range 10 - 20 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.5 and centrality range 10 - 20 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.2 and centrality range 20 - 30 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.3 and centrality range 20 - 30 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.4 and centrality range 20 - 30 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.5 and centrality range 20 - 30 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.2 and centrality range 30 - 40 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.3 and centrality range 30 - 40 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.4 and centrality range 30 - 40 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.5 and centrality range 30 - 40 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.2 and centrality range 40 - 50 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.3 and centrality range 40 - 50 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.4 and centrality range 40 - 50 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.5 and centrality range 40 - 50 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.2 and centrality range 50 - 60 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.3 and centrality range 50 - 60 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.4 and centrality range 50 - 60 %.
The covariance matrix for statistcal correlations for R = 0.5 and centrality range 50 - 60 %.
Two-particle correlations in relative azimuthal angle ($\Delta-\phi$) and pseudorapidity ($\Delta-\eta$) are measured in $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV p+Pb collisions using the ATLAS detector at the LHC. The measurements are performed using approximately 1 $\mu b^{-1}$ of data as a function of $p_T$ and the transverse energy ($\sum E_T^{Pb}$) summed over 3.1 < $\eta$ < 4.9 in the direction of the Pb beam. The correlation function, constructed from charged particles, exhibits a long-range (2<|$\Delta-\eta$|<5) near-side ($\Delta-\phi$ ~ 0) correlation that grows rapidly with increasing $\sum E_T^{Pb}$. A long-range away-side ($\Delta-\phi$ ~ pi) correlation, obtained by subtracting the expected contributions from recoiling dijets and other sources estimated using events with small $\sum E_T^{Pb}$, is found to match the near-side correlation in magnitude, shape (in $\Delta-\eta$ and $\Delta-\phi$) and $\sum E_T^{Pb}$ dependence. The resultant $\Delta-\phi$ correlation is approximately symmetric about $\pi$/2, and is consistent with a cos(2$\Delta-\phi$) modulation for all $\sum E_T^{Pb}$ ranges and particle $p_T$. The amplitude of this modulation is comparable in magnitude and $p_T$ dependence to similar modulations observed in heavy-ion collisions, suggestive of final-state collective effects in high multiplicity events.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 0.3 < pT(a) < 0.5 GeV and 0.5 < pT(b) < 4 GeV.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 0.5 < pT(a) < 1 GeV and 0.5 < pT(b) < 4 GeV.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 1 < pT(a) < 2 GeV and 0.5 < pT(b) < 4 GeV.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 2 < pT(a) < 3 GeV and 0.5 < pT(b) < 4 GeV.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 3 < pT(a) < 4 GeV and 0.5 < pT(b) < 4 GeV.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 4 < pT(a) < 5 GeV and 0.5 < pT(b) < 4 GeV.
Integrated per-trigger yields, Yint, versus pT(a) for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4 GeV, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class, on the near-side, |Delta(phi)| < PI/3.
Integrated per-trigger yields, Yint, versus pT(a) for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4 GeV, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class, on the near-side, |Delta(phi)| < PI/3.
Integrated per-trigger yields, Yint, versus pT(a) for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4 GeV, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class, on the near-side, |Delta(phi)| < PI/3.
Integrated per-trigger yields, Yint, versus pT(a) for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4 GeV, in the SUM(ET(PB)) < 20 GeV event class, on the near-side, |Delta(phi)| < PI/3.
Difference of the yield in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class from that in the SUM(ET(PB)) < 20 GeV event class, on the near-side, |Delta(phi)| < PI/3.
Difference of the yield in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class from that in the SUM(ET(PB)) < 20 GeV event class, on the near-side, |Delta(phi)| < PI/3.
Difference of the yield in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class from that in the SUM(ET(PB)) < 20 GeV event class, on the near-side, |Delta(phi)| < PI/3.
Integrated per-trigger yields, Yint, versus pT(a) for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4 GeV, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class, on the away-side, |Delta(phi)| > 2*PI/3.
Integrated per-trigger yields, Yint, versus pT(a) for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4 GeV, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class, on the away-side, |Delta(phi)| > 2*PI/3.
Integrated per-trigger yields, Yint, versus pT(a) for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4 GeV, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class, on the away-side, |Delta(phi)| > 2*PI/3.
Integrated per-trigger yields, Yint, versus pT(a) for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4 GeV, in the SUM(ET(PB)) < 20 GeV event class, on the away-side, |Delta(phi)| > 2*PI/3.
Difference of the yield in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class from that in the SUM(ET(PB)) < 20 GeV event class, on the away-side, |Delta(phi)| > 2*PI/3.
Difference of the yield in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class from that in the SUM(ET(PB)) < 20 GeV event class, on the away-side, |Delta(phi)| > 2*PI/3.
Difference of the yield in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class from that in the SUM(ET(PB)) < 20 GeV event class, on the away-side, |Delta(phi)| > 2*PI/3.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 1 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 1 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 1 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 1 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 1 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 1 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 1 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 1 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 1 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 1 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 1 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 1 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 1.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 1.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 1.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 1.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 1.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 1.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 1.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 1.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 1.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 1.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 1.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 1.5 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c2 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of c3 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
Integrated per-trigger yield, Yint, for 0.5 < pT(a,b) < 4 GeV, measured in intervals of SUM(ET(PB)), for the near-side (|Delta(phi)| < PI/3), away-side (|Delta(phi)| > 2*PI/3) and the difference between them, DELTA(Yint).
Integrated per-trigger yield, Yint, for 1 < pT(a,b) < 4 GeV, measured in intervals of SUM(ET(PB)), for the near-side (|Delta(phi)| < PI/3), away-side (|Delta(phi)| > 2*PI/3) and the difference between them, DELTA(Yint).
Integrated per-trigger yield, Yint, for 0.5 < pT(a,b) < 4 GeV, measured in intervals of Nch, where Nch represents the charged-particle multiplicity measured over |eta| < 2.5 with pT > 0.4 GeV, for the near-side (|Delta(phi)| < PI/3), away-side (|Delta(phi)| > 2*PI/3) and the difference between them, DELTA(Yint).
Integrated per-trigger yield, Yint, for 1 < pT(a,b) < 4 GeV, measured in intervals of Nch, where Nch represents the charged-particle multiplicity measured over |eta| < 2.5 with pT > 0.4 GeV, for the near-side (|Delta(phi)| < PI/3), away-side (|Delta(phi)| > 2*PI/3) and the difference between them, DELTA(Yint).
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s2 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) > 80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 55-80 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 0.5 < pT(b) < 1, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 1 < pT(b) < 2, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
The pT(a) dependence of s3 for 2 < pT(b) < 4, in the SUM(ET(PB)) = 25-55 GeV event class.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 3 < pT(a) < 4 GeV and 0.3 < pT(b) < 0.5 GeV.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 3 < pT(a) < 4 GeV and 0.5 < pT(b) < 1 GeV.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 3 < pT(a) < 4 GeV and 1 < pT(b) < 2 GeV.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 3 < pT(a) < 4 GeV and 2 < pT(b) < 3 GeV.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 2 < pT(a) < 3 GeV and 0.3 < pT(b) < 0.5 GeV.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 2 < pT(a) < 3 GeV and 0.5 < pT(b) < 1 GeV.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 2 < pT(a) < 3 GeV and 1 < pT(b) < 2 GeV.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 2 < pT(a) < 3 GeV and 2 < pT(b) < 3 GeV.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 1 < pT(a) < 2 GeV and 0.3 < pT(b) < 0.5 GeV.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 1 < pT(a) < 2 GeV and 0.5 < pT(b) < 1 GeV.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 1 < pT(a) < 2 GeV and 1 < pT(b) < 2 GeV.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 0.5 < pT(a) < 1 GeV and 0.3 < pT(b) < 0.5 GeV.
Distribution of per-trigger yield, Y(DELTA(PHI)), in the peripheral and the central event activity classes and their differences, for 0.5 < pT(a) < 1 GeV and 0.5 < pT(b) < 1 GeV.
The inclusive jet cross-section has been measured in proton-proton collisions at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV in a dataset corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 0.20pb-1 collected with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider in 2011. Jets are identified using the anti-kt algorithm with two radius parameters of 0.4 and 0.6. The inclusive jet double-differential cross-section is presented as a function of the jet transverse momentum pT and jet rapidity y, covering a range of 20 <= pT < 430 GeV and |y| < 4.4. The ratio of the cross-section to the inclusive jet cross-section measurement at sqrt(s)=7 TeV, published by the ATLAS Collaboration, is calculated as a function of both transverse momentum and the dimensionless quantity xT = 2 pT / sqrt(s), in bins of jet rapidity. The systematic uncertainties on the ratios are significantly reduced due to the cancellation of correlated uncertainties in the two measurements. Results are compared to the prediction from next-to-leading order perturbative QCD calculations corrected for non-perturbative effects, and next-to-leading order Monte Carlo simulation. Furthermore, the ATLAS jet cross-section measurements at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV and sqrt(s)=7 TeV are analysed within a framework of next-to-leading order perturbative QCD calculations to determine parton distribution functions of the proton, taking into account the correlations between the measurements.
The measured inclusive jet double-differential cross section in the rapidity bin |y| < 0.3 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured inclusive jet double-differential cross section in the rapidity bin 0.3 <= |y| < 0.8 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured inclusive jet double-differential cross section in the rapidity bin 0.8 <= |y| < 1.2 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured inclusive jet double-differential cross section in the rapidity bin 1.2 <= |y| < 2.1 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured inclusive jet double-differential cross section in the rapidity bin 2.1 <= |y| < 2.8 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured inclusive jet double-differential cross section in the rapidity bin 2.8 <= |y| < 3.6 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured inclusive jet double-differential cross section in the rapidity bin 3.6 <= |y| < 4.4 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured inclusive jet double-differential cross section in the rapidity bin |y| < 0.3 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured inclusive jet double-differential cross section in the rapidity bin 0.3 <= |y| < 0.8 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured inclusive jet double-differential cross section in the rapidity bin 0.8 <= |y| < 1.2 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured inclusive jet double-differential cross section in the rapidity bin 1.2 <= |y| < 2.1 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured inclusive jet double-differential cross section in the rapidity bin 2.1 <= |y| < 2.8 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured inclusive jet double-differential cross section in the rapidity bin 2.8 <= |y| < 3.6 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured inclusive jet double-differential cross section in the rapidity bin 3.6 <= |y| < 4.4 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin |y| < 0.3 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet XT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 0.3 <= |y| < 0.8 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet XT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 0.8 <= |y| < 1.2 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet XT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 1.2 <= |y| < 2.1 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet XT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 2.1 <= |y| < 2.8 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet XT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 2.8 <= |y| < 3.6 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet XT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 3.6 <= |y| < 4.4 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet XT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin |y| < 0.3 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet XT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 0.3 <= |y| < 0.8 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet XT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 0.8 <= |y| < 1.2 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet XT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 1.2 <= |y| < 2.1 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet XT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 2.1 <= |y| < 2.8 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet XT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 2.8 <= |y| < 3.6 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet XT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 3.6 <= |y| < 4.4 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet XT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin |y| < 0.3 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 0.3 <= |y| < 0.8 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 0.8 <= |y| < 1.2 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 1.2 <= |y| < 2.1 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 2.1 <= |y| < 2.8 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 2.8 <= |y| < 3.6 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 3.6 <= |y| < 4.4 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.4 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin |y| < 0.3 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 0.3 <= |y| < 0.8 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 0.8 <= |y| < 1.2 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 1.2 <= |y| < 2.1 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 2.1 <= |y| < 2.8 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 2.8 <= |y| < 3.6 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
The measured ratio of inclusive jet cross sections at sqrt(s)=2.76 TeV to the one at sqrt(s)=7 TeV in the rapidity bin 3.6 <= |y| < 4.4 for anti-kt jets with R = 0.6 as a function of the jet PT. The first (sys) error is the combined correlated systematic error and the second the combined uncorrelated systematic error, excluding the luminosity uncertainty. Also shown are the multiplicative non-perturbative corrections, NPcorr.
We present a measurement of two-particle angular correlations in proton-proton collisions at sqrt(s) = 900 GeV and 7 TeV. The collision events were collected during 2009 and 2010 with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider using a single-arm minimum bias trigger. Correlations are measured for charged particles produced in the kinematic range of transverse momentum pT > 100 MeV and pseudorapidity |eta| < 2.5. A complex structure in pseudorapidity and azimuth is observed at both collision energies. Results are compared to Pythia 8 and Herwig++ as well as to the AMBT2B, DW and Perugia 2011 tunes of Pythia 6. The data are not satisfactorily described by any of these models.
Corrected two particle RCORR distribution as a function of Delta(ETARAP) obtained by integrating the foreground and background distributions over Delta(PHI) between 0 and PI.
Corrected two particle RCORR distribution as a function of Delta(ETARAP) obtained by integrating the foreground and background distributions over Delta(PHI) between 0 and PI/2.
Corrected two particle RCORR distribution as a function of Delta(ETARAP) obtained by integrating the foreground and background distributions over Delta(PHI) between PI/2 and PI.
Corrected two particle RCORR distribution as a function of Delta(PHI) obtained by integrating the foreground and background distributions over Delta(ETARAP) between 0 and 2.
Corrected two particle RCORR distribution as a function of Delta(PHI) obtained by integrating the foreground and background distributions over Delta(ETARAP) between 2 and 5.
The distributions of event-by-event harmonic flow coefficients v_n for n=2-4 are measured in sqrt(s_NN)=2.76 TeV Pb+Pb collisions using the ATLAS detector at the LHC. The measurements are performed using charged particles with transverse momentum pT> 0.5 GeV and in the pseudorapidity range |eta|<2.5 in a dataset of approximately 7 ub^-1 recorded in 2010. The shapes of the v_n distributions are described by a two-dimensional Gaussian function for the underlying flow vector in central collisions for v_2 and over most of the measured centrality range for v_3 and v_4. Significant deviations from this function are observed for v_2 in mid-central and peripheral collisions, and a small deviation is observed for v_3 in mid-central collisions. It is shown that the commonly used multi-particle cumulants are insensitive to the deviations for v_2. The v_n distributions are also measured independently for charged particles with 0.5<pT<1 GeV and pT>1 GeV. When these distributions are rescaled to the same mean values, the adjusted shapes are found to be nearly the same for these two pT ranges. The v_n distributions are compared with the eccentricity distributions from two models for the initial collision geometry: a Glauber model and a model that includes corrections to the initial geometry due to gluon saturation effects. Both models fail to describe the experimental data consistently over most of the measured centrality range.
The relationship between centrality intervals and MEAN(Npart) estimated from the Glauber model.
The MEAN(Npart) dependence of MEAN(V2) for three pT ranges together with the total systematic uncertainties.
The MEAN(Npart) dependence of SIGMA(V2) for three pT ranges together with the total systematic uncertainties.
The MEAN(Npart) dependence of SIGMA(V2)/MEAN(V2) for three pT ranges together with the total systematic uncertainties.
The MEAN(Npart) dependence of MEAN(V3) for three pT ranges together with the total systematic uncertainties.
The MEAN(Npart) dependence of SIGMA(V3) for three pT ranges together with the total systematic uncertainties.
The MEAN(Npart) dependence of SIGMA(V3)/MEAN(V3) for three pT ranges together with the total systematic uncertainties.
The MEAN(Npart) dependence of MEAN(V4) for three pT ranges together with the total systematic uncertainties.
The MEAN(Npart) dependence of SIGMA(V4) for three pT ranges together with the total systematic uncertainties.
The MEAN(Npart) dependence of SIGMA(V4)/MEAN(V4) for three pT ranges together with the total systematic uncertainties.
Eccentricity curves for EPSILON2 in Figure 12.
Eccentricity curves for EPSILON3 in Figure 12.
Eccentricity curves for EPSILON4 in Figure 12.
Comparison of MEAN(V2) and SQRT(MEAN(V2**2)), derived from the EbyE V2 distributions, with the V2(EP), for charged particles in the pT > 0.5 GeV range.
The ratios of SQRT(MEAN(V2**2)) and V2(EP) to MEAN(V2), for charged particles in the pT > 0.5 GeV range.
Comparison of MEAN(V3) and SQRT(MEAN(V3**2)), derived from the EbyE V3 distributions, with the V3(EP), for charged particles in the pT > 0.5 GeV range.
The ratios of SQRT(MEAN(V3**2)) and V3(EP) to MEAN(V3), for charged particles in the pT > 0.5 GeV range.
Comparison of MEAN(V4) and SQRT(MEAN(V4**2)), derived from the EbyE V4 distributions, with the V4(EP), for charged particles in the pT > 0.5 GeV range.
The ratios of SQRT(MEAN(V4**2)) and V4(EP) to MEAN(V4), for charged particles in the pT > 0.5 GeV range.
Comparison of MEAN(V2) and SQRT(MEAN(V2**2)), derived from the EbyE V2 distributions, with the V2(EP), for charged particles in the 0.5 < pT < 1 GeV range.
The ratios of SQRT(MEAN(V2**2)) and V2(EP) to MEAN(V2), for charged particles in the 0.5 < pT < 1 GeV range.
Comparison of MEAN(V3) and SQRT(MEAN(V3**2)), derived from the EbyE V3 distributions, with the V3(EP), for charged particles in the 0.5 < pT < 1 GeV range.
The ratios of SQRT(MEAN(V3**2)) and V3(EP) to MEAN(V3), for charged particles in the 0.5 < pT < 1 GeV range.
Comparison of MEAN(V4) and SQRT(MEAN(V4**2)), derived from the EbyE V4 distributions, with the V4(EP), for charged particles in the 0.5 < pT < 1 GeV range.
The ratios of SQRT(MEAN(V4**2)) and V4(EP) to MEAN(V4), for charged particles in the 0.5 < pT < 1 GeV range.
Comparison of MEAN(V2) and SQRT(MEAN(V2**2)), derived from the EbyE V2 distributions, with the V2(EP), for charged particles in the pT > 1 GeV range.
The ratios of SQRT(MEAN(V2**2)) and V2(EP) to MEAN(V2), for charged particles in the pT > 1 GeV range.
Comparison of MEAN(V3) and SQRT(MEAN(V3**2)), derived from the EbyE V3 distributions, with the V3(EP), for charged particles in the pT > 1 GeV range.
The ratios of SQRT(MEAN(V3**2)) and V3(EP) to MEAN(V3), for charged particles in the pT > 1 GeV range.
Comparison of MEAN(V4) and SQRT(MEAN(V4**2)), derived from the EbyE V4 distributions, with the V4(EP), for charged particles in the pT > 1 GeV range.
The ratios of SQRT(MEAN(V4**2)) and V4(EP) to MEAN(V4), for charged particles in the pT > 1 GeV range.
Bessel-Gaussian fit parameters from Eq. (1.4) and total errors.
The dependence of MEAN(V2) and V2(RP) on MEAN(Npart).
The dependence of SIGMA(V2) and DELTA(V2) on MEAN(Npart).
The dependence of SIGMA(V2) / MEAN(V2) and DELTA(V2) / V2(RP) on MEAN(Npart).
Comparison of the V2(RP) obtained from the Bessel-Gaussian fit of the V2 distributions with the values for two-particle (V2(calc){2}), four-particle (V2(calc){4}), six-particle (V2(calc){6}) and eight-particle (V2(calc){8}) cumulants calculated directly from the unfolded V2 distributions.
The ratios of the four-particle (V2(calc){4}), six-particle (V2(calc){6}) and eight-particle (V2(calc){8}) cumulants to the fit results (V2(RP)), with the total uncertainties.
The ratios of the six-particle (V2(calc){6}) and eight-particle (V2(calc){8}) cumulants to the four-particle (V2(calc){4}) cumulants, with the total uncertainties.
Comparison of the V3(RP) obtained from the Bessel-Gaussian fit of the V3 distributions with the values for two-particle (V3(calc){2}), four-particle (V3(calc){4}), six-particle (V3(calc){6}) and eight-particle (V3(calc){8}) cumulants calculated directly from the unfolded V3 distributions.
The ratios of the four-particle (V3(calc){4}), six-particle (V3(calc){6}) and eight-particle (V3(calc){8}) cumulants to the fit results (V3(RP)), with the total uncertainties.
The ratios of the six-particle (V3(calc){6}) and eight-particle (V3(calc){8}) cumulants to the four-particle (V3(calc){4}) cumulants, with the total uncertainties.
The standard deviation (SIGMA(V2)), the width obtained from Bessel-Gaussian function (DELTA(V2)), the width F1 = SQRT( ( V2(calc){2}**2 - V2(calc){4}**2 ) / 2 ) estimated from the two-particle cumulant (V2(calc){2}) and four-particle cumulant (V2(calc){4}), where these cumulants are calculated analytically via Eq. (5.3) from the V2 distribution.
Various estimates of the relative fluctuations given as SIGMA(V2) / MEAN(V2), DELTA(V2) / V2(RP), F2 = SQRT( ( V2(calc){2}**2 - V2(calc){4}**2) / ( 2*V2(calc){4}**2 ) ) and F3 = SQRT( ( V2(calc){2}**2 - V2(calc){4}**2) / ( V2(calc){2}**2 + V2(calc){4}**2 ) ).
Comparison in 0.5 < pT < 1 GeV of the V2(RP) obtained from the Bessel-Gaussian fit of the V2 distributions with the values for two-particle (V2(calc){2}), four-particle (V2(calc){4}), six-particle (V2(calc){6}) and eight-particle (V2(calc){8}) cumulants calculated directly from the unfolded V2 distributions.
The ratios for 0.5 < pT < 1 GeV of the four-particle (V2(calc){4}), six-particle (V2(calc){6}) and eight-particle (V2(calc){8}) cumulants to the fit results (V2(RP)), with the total uncertainties.
The ratios for 0.5 < pT < 1 GeV of the six-particle (V2(calc){6}) and eight-particle (V2(calc){8}) cumulants to the four-particle (V2(calc){4}) cumulants, with the total uncertainties.
Comparison in pT > 1 GeV of the V2(RP) obtained from the Bessel-Gaussian fit of the V2 distributions with the values for two-particle (V2(calc){2}), four-particle (V2(calc){4}), six-particle (V2(calc){6}) and eight-particle (V2(calc){8}) cumulants calculated directly from the unfolded V2 distributions.
The ratios for pT > 1 GeV of the four-particle (V2(calc){4}), six-particle (V2(calc){6}) and eight-particle (V2(calc){8}) cumulants to the fit results (V2(RP)), with the total uncertainties.
The ratios for pT > 1 GeV of the six-particle (V2(calc){6}) and eight-particle (V2(calc){8}) cumulants to the four-particle (V2(calc){4}) cumulants, with the total uncertainties.
The values of V2(RP) and V2(RP,obs) obtained from the Bessel-Gaussian fits to the V2 and V2(obs) distributions, with the statistical uncertainties.
The values of DELTA(V2) and DELTA(V2,obs) obtained from the Bessel-Gaussian fits to the V2 and V2(obs) distributions, with the statistical uncertainties.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Measurements of the variation of inclusive jet suppression as a function of relative azimuthal angle, Delta phi, with respect to the elliptic event plane provide insight into the path-length dependence of jet quenching. ATLAS has measured the Delta phi dependence of jet yields in 0.14 nb^-1 of sqrt(s(NN))= 2.76 TeV Pb+Pb collisions at the LHC for jet transverse momenta p_T > 45 GeV in different collision centrality bins using an underlying event subtraction procedure that accounts for elliptic flow. The variation of the jet yield with Delta phi was characterized by the parameter, v_2^jet, and the ratio of out-of-plane (Delta phi ~ pi/2) to in-plane (Delta phi ~ 0) yields. Non-zero v_2^jet values were measured in all centrality bins for p_T < 160 GeV. The jet yields are observed to vary by as much as 20% between in-plane and out-of-plane directions.
jet v2 vs jet pT for 5 to 10% centrality
jet v2 vs jet pT for 10 to 20% centrality
jet v2 vs jet pT for 20 to 30% centrality
jet v2 vs jet pT for 30 to 40% centrality
jet v2 vs jet pT for 40 to 50% centrality
jet v2 vs jet pT for 50 to 60% centrality
jet v2 vs average Npart for 45 < pT < 60 GeV
jet v2 vs average Npart for 60 < pT < 80 GeV
jet v2 vs average Npart for 80 < pT < 110 GeV
jet v2 vs average Npart for 110 < pT < 160 GeV
This article presents a search for new resonances decaying into a $Z$ or $W$ boson and a 125 GeV Higgs boson $h$, and it targets the $\nu\bar{\nu}b\bar{b}$, $\ell^+\ell^-b\bar{b}$, or $\ell^{\pm}{\nu}b\bar{b}$ final states, where $\ell=e$ or $\mu$, in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV. The data used correspond to a total integrated luminosity of 139 fb$^{-1}$ collected by the ATLAS detector during Run 2 of the LHC at CERN. The search is conducted by examining the reconstructed invariant or transverse mass distributions of $Zh$ or $Wh$ candidates for evidence of a localised excess in the mass range from 220 GeV to 5 TeV. No significant excess is observed and 95% confidence-level upper limits between 1.3 pb and 0.3 fb are placed on the production cross section times branching fraction of neutral and charged spin-1 resonances and CP-odd scalar bosons. These limits are converted into constraints on the parameter space of the Heavy Vector Triplet model and the two-Higgs-doublet model.
Acceptance * reconstruction efficiency for the P P --> Zprime --> Zh --> vvbb/cc signals in the 0-lepton channel.
Acceptance * reconstruction efficiency for the P P --> Zprime --> Zh --> vvbb/cc signals in the 0-lepton channel.
Acceptance * reconstruction efficiency for the P P --> Zprime --> Zh --> llbb/cc signals in the 2-lepton channel.
Acceptance * reconstruction efficiency for the P P --> Zprime --> Zh --> llbb/cc signals in the 2-lepton channel.
Acceptance * reconstruction efficiency for the P P --> bbA --> Zh --> vvbb signals in the 0-lepton channel.
Acceptance * reconstruction efficiency for the P P --> bbA --> Zh --> vvbb signals in the 0-lepton channel.
Acceptance * reconstruction efficiency for the P P --> bbA --> Zh --> llbb signals in the 2-lepton channel.
Acceptance * reconstruction efficiency for the P P --> bbA --> Zh --> llbb signals in the 2-lepton channel.
Acceptance * reconstruction efficiency for the P P --> Wprime --> Zh --> lvbb/cc signals in the 0-lepton channel.
Acceptance * reconstruction efficiency for the P P --> Wprime --> Zh --> lvbb/cc signals in the 0-lepton channel.
Acceptance * reconstruction efficiency for the P P --> Wprime --> Zh --> lvbb/cc signals in the 1-lepton channel.
Acceptance * reconstruction efficiency for the P P --> Wprime --> Zh --> lvbb/cc signals in the 1-lepton channel.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 1 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 1 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 2 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 2 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{Vh}$ for the 2-lepton channel in the resolved 1 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{Vh}$ for the 2-lepton channel in the resolved 1 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{Vh}$ for the 2-lepton channel in the resolved 2 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{Vh}$ for the 2-lepton channel in the resolved 2 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 1 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 1 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 2 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 2 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{Vh}$ for the 2-lepton channel in the merged 1 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{Vh}$ for the 2-lepton channel in the merged 1 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{Vh}$ for the 2-lepton channel in the merged 2 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{Vh}$ for the 2-lepton channel in the merged 2 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 1-lepton channel in the resolved 1 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 1-lepton channel in the resolved 1 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 1-lepton channel in the resolved 2 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 1-lepton channel in the resolved 2 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 1-lepton channel in the merged 1 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 1-lepton channel in the merged 1 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 1-lepton channel in the merged 2 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 1-lepton channel in the merged 2 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 3+ b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood bbA fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 3+ b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood bbA fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{Vh}$ for the 2-lepton channel in the resolved 3+ b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood bbA fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{Vh}$ for the 2-lepton channel in the resolved 3+ b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood bbA fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 2 b-tag signal region with additional b-tagged track jets not associated with the large-R jet. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood bbA fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 2 b-tag signal region with additional b-tagged track jets not associated with the large-R jet. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood bbA fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{Vh}$ for the 2-lepton channel in the merged 1+2 b-tag signal region with additional b-tagged track jets not associated with the large-R jet. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood bbA fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{Vh}$ for the 2-lepton channel in the merged 1+2 b-tag signal region with additional b-tagged track jets not associated with the large-R jet. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood bbA fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 1 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 1 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 2 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 2 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 1-lepton channel in the resolved 1 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 1-lepton channel in the resolved 1 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 1-lepton channel in the resolved 2 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 1-lepton channel in the resolved 2 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 1 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 1 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 2 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 2 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 1-lepton channel in the merged 1 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 1-lepton channel in the merged 1 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 1-lepton channel in the merged 2 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 1-lepton channel in the merged 2 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 1 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 1 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 2 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 2 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{Vh}$ for the 2-lepton channel in the resolved top control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{Vh}$ for the 2-lepton channel in the resolved top control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 1 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 1 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 2 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 2 b-tag sideband control region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood Z' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Upper limits on Zprime to Z h production cross section times branching fraction in pb.
Upper limits on Zprime to Z h production cross section times branching fraction in pb.
Upper limits on Wprime to W h production cross section times branching fraction in pb.
Upper limits on Wprime to W h production cross section times branching fraction in pb.
Upper limits on ggA to Z h production cross section times branching fraction in pb.
Upper limits on ggA to Z h production cross section times branching fraction in pb.
Upper limits on bbA to Z h production cross section times branching fraction in pb.
Upper limits on bbA to Z h production cross section times branching fraction in pb.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 220 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 220 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 260 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 260 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 300 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 300 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 340 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 340 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 380 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 380 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 400 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 400 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 420 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 420 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 440 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 440 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 460 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 460 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 500 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 500 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 600 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 600 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 700 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 700 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 800 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 800 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 900 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 900 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 1000 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 1000 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 1200 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 1200 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 1400 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 1400 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 1600 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 1600 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 2000 GeV.
Expected and observed two-dimensional likelihood scans of the b-associated production cross section times branching fraction vs the gluon-fusion production cross section times branching fraction at $m_{A}$ = 2000 GeV.
Acceptance * reconstruction efficiency for the P P --> A --> Zh --> vvbb signal in the 0-lepton channel.
Acceptance * reconstruction efficiency for the P P --> A --> Zh --> vvbb signal in the 0-lepton channel.
Acceptance * reconstruction efficiency for the P P --> A --> Zh --> llbb signal in the 2-lepton channel.
Acceptance * reconstruction efficiency for the P P --> A --> Zh --> llbb signal in the 2-lepton channel.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 1 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 1 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 2 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the resolved 2 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 1 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 1 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 2 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Event distributions of $m_{T,Vh}$ for the 0-lepton channel in the merged 2 b-tag signal region. The background prediction is shown after a background-only maximum-likelihood W' fit to the data. In the plot, the last bin contains the overflow.
Distributions of expected upper limits at 95% confidence level on the cross section of P P --> A --> Zh as a function of bbA fraction an signal mass.
Distributions of expected upper limits at 95% confidence level on the cross section of P P --> A --> Zh as a function of bbA fraction an signal mass.
Distributions of observed upper limits at 95% confidence level on the cross section of P P --> A --> Zh as a function of bbA fraction an signal mass.
Distributions of observed upper limits at 95% confidence level on the cross section of P P --> A --> Zh as a function of bbA fraction an signal mass.
The correlations between flow harmonics $v_n$ for $n=2$, 3 and 4 and mean transverse momentum $[p_\mathrm{T}]$ in $^{129}$Xe+$^{129}$Xe and $^{208}$Pb+$^{208}$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=5.44$ TeV and 5.02 TeV, respectively, are measured using charged particles with the ATLAS detector. The correlations are sensitive to the shape and size of the initial geometry, nuclear deformation, and initial momentum anisotropy. The effects from non-flow and centrality fluctuations are minimized, respectively, via a subevent cumulant method and event activity selection based on particle production in the very forward rapidity. The results show strong dependences on centrality, harmonic number $n$, $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ and pseudorapidity range. Current models describe qualitatively the overall centrality- and system-dependent trends but fail to quantitatively reproduce all the data. In the central collisions, where models generally show good agreement, the $v_2$-$[p_\mathrm{T}]$ correlations are sensitive to the triaxiality of the quadruple deformation. The comparison of model to the Pb+Pb and Xe+Xe data suggests that the $^{129}$Xe nucleus is a highly deformed triaxial ellipsoid that is neither a prolate nor an oblate shape. This provides strong evidence for a triaxial deformation of $^{129}$Xe nucleus using high-energy heavy-ion collision.
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.3< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.3< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.3< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$Cov_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$Cov_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$Cov_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$Cov_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$Cov_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$Cov_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ for peripheral events, Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ for peripheral events, Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ for peripheral events, Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ for peripheral events, Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ for peripheral events, Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ for peripheral events, Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ for peripheral events, Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ for peripheral events, Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ for peripheral events, Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ for peripheral events, Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ for peripheral events, Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ for peripheral events, Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$, Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$, Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{3}$, Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{3}$, Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$, Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$, Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{3}$, Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{3}$, Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ for central events, Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ for central events, Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ for central events, Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ for central events, Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ ratio between Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV and Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV for central events, Three_subevent method, for , $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ ratio between Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV and Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV for central events, Three_subevent method, for , $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\Sigma E_{T}$ vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV
$\Sigma E_{T}$ vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV
$\rho_{2}$ ratio between Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV and Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV for central events, Standard method, for , $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ ratio between Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV and Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV for central events, Standard method, for , $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ ratio between Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV and Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV for central events, Combined_subevent method, for , $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ ratio between Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV and Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV for central events, Combined_subevent method, for , $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ ratio between Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV and Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV for central events, Three_subevent method, for , $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ ratio between Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV and Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV for central events, Three_subevent method, for , $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ ratio between Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV and Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV for central events, Combined_subevent method, for , $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ ratio between Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV and Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV for central events, Combined_subevent method, for , $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{3}$ for central events, Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{3}$ for central events, Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{3}$ for central events, Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{3}$ for central events, Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{3}$ ratio between Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV and Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV for central events, Standard method, for , $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{3}$ ratio between Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV and Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV for central events, Standard method, for , $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{3}$ ratio between Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV and Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV for central events, Combined_subevent method, for , $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{3}$ ratio between Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV and Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV for central events, Combined_subevent method, for , $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality,
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$\rho_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{2}$ Standard method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{3}$ Standard method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{4}$ Standard method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$Cov_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Standard method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Standard method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Standard method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{3}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Two_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$Cov_{4}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$ based Centrality.
$c_{k}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$c_{k}$ Standard method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$var(v^{2}_{2})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$var(v^{2}_{2})$ Combined subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$var(v^{2}_{3})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$var(v^{2}_{3})$ Combined subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$var(v^{2}_{4})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$var(v^{2}_{4})$ Combined subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$c_{k}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$.
$c_{k}$ Standard method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$.
$var(v^{2}_{2})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$.
$var(v^{2}_{2})$ Combined subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$.
$var(v^{2}_{3})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$.
$var(v^{2}_{3})$ Combined subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$.
$var(v^{2}_{4})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$.
$var(v^{2}_{4})$ Combined subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$.
$c_{k}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$c_{k}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$var(v^{2}_{2})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$var(v^{2}_{2})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$var(v^{2}_{3})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$var(v^{2}_{3})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$var(v^{2}_{4})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$var(v^{2}_{4})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$.
$c_{k}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$.
$c_{k}$ Standard method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$.
$var(v^{2}_{2})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$.
$var(v^{2}_{2})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$.
$var(v^{2}_{3})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$.
$var(v^{2}_{3})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$.
$var(v^{2}_{4})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$.
$var(v^{2}_{4})$ Combined subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N^{rec}_{ch}$.
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
Differential measurements of charged particle azimuthal anisotropy are presented for lead-lead collisions at sqrt(s_NN) = 2.76 TeV with the ATLAS detector at the LHC, based on an integrated luminosity of approximately 8 mb^-1. This anisotropy is characterized via a Fourier expansion of the distribution of charged particles in azimuthal angle (phi), with the coefficients v_n denoting the magnitude of the anisotropy. Significant v_2-v_6 values are obtained as a function of transverse momentum (0.5<pT<20 GeV), pseudorapidity (|eta|<2.5) and centrality using an event plane method. The v_n values for n>=3 are found to vary weakly with both eta and centrality, and their pT dependencies are found to follow an approximate scaling relation, v_n^{1/n}(pT) \propto v_2^{1/2}(pT). A Fourier analysis of the charged particle pair distribution in relative azimuthal angle (Dphi=phi_a-phi_b) is performed to extract the coefficients v_{n,n}=<cos (n Dphi)>. For pairs of charged particles with a large pseudorapidity gap (|Deta=eta_a-eta_b|>2) and one particle with pT<3 GeV, the v_{2,2}-v_{6,6} values are found to factorize as v_{n,n}(pT^a,pT^b) ~ v_n(pT^a)v_n(pT^b) in central and mid-central events. Such factorization suggests that these values of v_{2,2}-v_{6,6} are primarily due to the response of the created matter to the fluctuations in the geometry of the initial state. A detailed study shows that the v_{1,1}(pT^a,pT^b) data are consistent with the combined contributions from a rapidity-even v_1 and global momentum conservation. A two-component fit is used to extract the v_1 contribution. The extracted v_1 is observed to cross zero at pT\sim1.0 GeV, reaches a maximum at 4-5 GeV with a value comparable to that for v_3, and decreases at higher pT.
The azimuthal variation of jet yields in heavy-ion collisions provides information about the path-length dependence of the energy loss experienced by partons passing through the hot, dense nuclear matter known as the quark-gluon plasma. This paper presents the azimuthal anisotropy coefficients $v_2$, $v_3$, and $v_4$ measured for jets in Pb+Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 5.02 TeV using the ATLAS detector at the LHC. The measurement uses data collected in 2015 and 2018, corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 2.2 nb$^{-1}$. The $v_n$ values are measured as a function of the transverse momentum of the jets between 71 GeV and 398 GeV and the event centrality. A nonzero value of $v_2$ is observed in all but the most central collisions. The value of $v_2$ is largest for jets with lower transverse momentum, with values up to 0.05 in mid-central collisions. A smaller, nonzero value of $v_3$ of approximately 0.01 is measured with no significant dependence on jet $p_T$ or centrality, suggesting that fluctuations in the initial state play a small but distinct role in jet energy loss. No significant deviation of $v_4$ from zero is observed in the measured kinematic region.
When you search on a word, e.g. 'collisions', we will automatically search across everything we store about a record. But, sometimes you may wish to be more specific. Here we show you how.
Guidance and examples on the query string syntax can be found in the Elasticsearch documentation.
About HEPData Submitting to HEPData HEPData File Formats HEPData Coordinators HEPData Terms of Use HEPData Cookie Policy
Status
Email
Forum
Twitter
GitHub
Copyright ~1975-Present, HEPData | Powered by Invenio, funded by STFC, hosted and originally developed at CERN, supported and further developed at IPPP Durham.