Showing 10 of 451 results
The production cross-sections for $W^{\pm}$ and $Z$ bosons are measured using ATLAS data corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 4.0 pb$^{-1}$ collected at a centre-of-mass energy $\sqrt{s}=2.76$ TeV. The decay channels $W \rightarrow \ell \nu$ and $Z \rightarrow \ell \ell $ are used, where $\ell$ can be an electron or a muon. The cross-sections are presented for a fiducial region defined by the detector acceptance and are also extrapolated to the full phase space for the total inclusive production cross-section. The combined (average) total inclusive cross-sections for the electron and muon channels are: \begin{eqnarray} \sigma^{\text{tot}}_{W^{+}\rightarrow \ell \nu}& = & 2312 \pm 26\ (\text{stat.})\ \pm 27\ (\text{syst.}) \pm 72\ (\text{lumi.}) \pm 30\ (\text{extr.})\text{pb} \nonumber, \\ \sigma^{\text{tot}}_{W^{-}\rightarrow \ell \nu}& = & 1399 \pm 21\ (\text{stat.})\ \pm 17\ (\text{syst.}) \pm 43\ (\text{lumi.}) \pm 21\ (\text{extr.})\text{pb} \nonumber, \\ \sigma^{\text{tot}}_{Z \rightarrow \ell \ell}& = & 323.4 \pm 9.8\ (\text{stat.}) \pm 5.0\ (\text{syst.}) \pm 10.0\ (\text{lumi.}) \pm 5.5 (\text{extr.}) \text{pb} \nonumber. \end{eqnarray} Measured ratios and asymmetries constructed using these cross-sections are also presented. These observables benefit from full or partial cancellation of many systematic uncertainties that are correlated between the different measurements.
The spectra measurements of charged hadrons produced in the shower of a parton originating in the same hard scattering with a leptonically decaying Z boson, are reported in lead-lead (PbPb) and proton-proton (pp) collisions at a nucleon-nucleon center-of-mass energy of 5.02 TeV. Both PbPb and pp data sets are recorded by the CMS experiment at the LHC, and correspond to an integrated luminosity of 1.7 nb$^{-1}$ and 320 pb$^{-1}$, respectively. Hadronic collision data with one reconstructed Z boson candidate with the transverse momentum $p_\mathrm{T}$$\gt$ 30 GeV/$c$ are analyzed. The Z boson constrains the initial energy and direction of the associated parton. In heavy ion events, azimuthal angular distributions of charged hadrons with respect to the direction of a Z boson are sensitive to modifications of the in-medium parton shower and medium response. Compared to reference data from pp interactions, the results for central PbPb collisions indicate a modification of the angular correlations. The measurements of the fragmentation functions and $p_\mathrm{T}$ spectra of charged particles in Z boson events, which are sensitive to medium modifications of the parton shower longitudinal structure, are also reported. Significant modifications in central PbPb events compared to pp reference data are also found for these observables.
Distributions of $\Delta\phi_{\mathrm{trk,Z}}$ in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV.
Distributions of $\Delta\phi_{\mathrm{trk,Z}}$ in 70-90% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
Distributions of $\Delta\phi_{\mathrm{trk,Z}}$ in 50-70% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
Distributions of $\Delta\phi_{\mathrm{trk,Z}}$ in 30-50% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
Distributions of $\Delta\phi_{\mathrm{trk,Z}}$ in 0-30% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
PbPb - pp difference of $\Delta\phi_{\mathrm{trk,Z}}$ distributions for 70-90% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
PbPb - pp difference of $\Delta\phi_{\mathrm{trk,Z}}$ distributions for 50-70% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
PbPb - pp difference of $\Delta\phi_{\mathrm{trk,Z}}$ distributions for 30-50% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
PbPb - pp difference of $\Delta\phi_{\mathrm{trk,Z}}$ distributions for 0-30% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
Distributions of $\xi^{\mathrm{trk,Z}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV.
Distributions of $\xi^{\mathrm{trk,Z}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in 70-90% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
Distributions of $\xi^{\mathrm{trk,Z}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in 50-70% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
Distributions of $\xi^{\mathrm{trk,Z}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in 30-50% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
Distributions of $\xi^{\mathrm{trk,Z}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in 0-30% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
PbPb / pp ratio of $\xi^{\mathrm{trk,Z}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ distributions for 70-90% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
PbPb / pp ratio of $\xi^{\mathrm{trk,Z}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ distributions for 50-70% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
PbPb / pp ratio of $\xi^{\mathrm{trk,Z}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ distributions for 30-50% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
PbPb / pp ratio of $\xi^{\mathrm{trk,Z}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ distributions for 0-30% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
Distributions of p$^{\mathrm{trk}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV.
Distributions of p$^{\mathrm{trk}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in pp collisions at 5.02 TeV.
Distributions of p$^{\mathrm{trk}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in 70-90% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
Distributions of p$^{\mathrm{trk}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in 50-70% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
Distributions of p$^{\mathrm{trk}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in 30-50% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
Distributions of p$^{\mathrm{trk}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ in 0-30% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
PbPb / pp ratio of p$^{\mathrm{trk}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ distributions for 70-90% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
PbPb / pp ratio of p$^{\mathrm{trk}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ distributions for 50-70% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
PbPb / pp ratio of p$^{\mathrm{trk}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ distributions for 30-50% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
PbPb / pp ratio of p$^{\mathrm{trk}}_{\mathrm{T}}$ distributions for 0-30% centrality PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV.
Jet quenching is the process of color-charged partons losing energy via interactions with quark-gluon plasma droplets created in heavy-ion collisions. The collective expansion of such droplets is well described by viscous hydrodynamics. Similar evidence of collectivity is consistently observed in smaller collision systems, including $pp$ and $p$+Pb collisions. In contrast, while jet quenching is observed in Pb+Pb collisions, no evidence has been found in these small systems to date, raising fundamental questions about the nature of the system created in these collisions. The ATLAS experiment at the Large Hadron Collider has measured the yield of charged hadrons correlated with reconstructed jets in 0.36 nb$^{-1}$ of $p$+Pb and 3.6 pb$^{-1}$ of $pp$ collisions at 5.02 TeV. The yields of charged hadrons with $p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{ch} >0.5$ GeV near and opposite in azimuth to jets with $p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{jet} > 30$ or $60$ GeV, and the ratios of these yields between $p$+Pb and $pp$ collisions, $I_{p\mathrm{Pb}}$, are reported. The collision centrality of $p$+Pb events is categorized by the energy deposited by forward neutrons from the struck nucleus. The $I_{p\mathrm{Pb}}$ values are consistent with unity within a few percent for hadrons with $p_\mathrm{T}^\mathrm{ch} >4$ GeV at all centralities. These data provide new, strong constraints which preclude almost any parton energy loss in central $p$+Pb collisions.
The per-jet charged particle yield in pPb and pp collisions for hadrons near a $p_{T}^{\textrm{jet}} > 30~\textrm{GeV}$ jet ($\Delta\phi_{\textrm{ch,jet}} < \pi/8$).
The per-jet charged particle yield in pPb and pp collisions for hadrons opposite to a $p_{T}^{\textrm{jet}} > 30~\textrm{GeV}$ jet ($\Delta\phi_{\textrm{ch,jet}} > 7\pi/8$).
The per-jet charged particle yield in pPb and pp collisions for hadrons near a $p_{T}^{\textrm{jet}} > 60~\textrm{GeV}$ jet ($\Delta\phi_{\textrm{ch,jet}} < \pi/8$).
The per-jet charged particle yield in pPb and pp collisions for hadrons opposite to a $p_{T}^{\textrm{jet}} > 60~\textrm{GeV}$ jet ($\Delta\phi_{\textrm{ch,jet}} > 7\pi/8$).
The ratio of per-jet charged particle yields in pPb and pp collisions, $I_{pPb}$, for hadrons near a $p_{T}^{\textrm{jet}} > 30~\textrm{GeV}$ jet ($\Delta\phi_{\textrm{ch,jet}} < \pi/8$).
The ratio of per-jet charged particle yields in pPb and pp collisions, $I_{pPb}$, for hadrons opposite to a $p_{T}^{\textrm{jet}} > 30~\textrm{GeV}$ jet ($\Delta\phi_{\textrm{ch,jet}} > 7\pi/8$).
The ratio of per-jet charged particle yields in pPb and pp collisions, $I_{pPb}$, for hadrons near a $p_{T}^{\textrm{jet}} > 60~\textrm{GeV}$ jet ($\Delta\phi_{\textrm{ch,jet}} < \pi/8$).
The ratio of per-jet charged particle yields in pPb and pp collisions, $I_{pPb}$, for hadrons opposite to a $p_{T}^{\textrm{jet}} > 60~\textrm{GeV}$ jet ($\Delta\phi_{\textrm{ch,jet}} > 7\pi/8$).
The azimuthal ($\Delta\varphi$) correlation distributions between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles are measured in pp and p$-$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV. Results are reported for electrons with transverse momentum $4<p_{\rm T}<16$ GeV/$c$ and pseudorapidity $|\eta|<0.6$. The associated charged particles are selected with transverse momentum $1<p_{\rm T}<7$ GeV/$c$, and relative pseudorapidity separation with the leading electron $|\Delta\eta| < 1$. The correlation measurements are performed to study and characterize the fragmentation and hadronization of heavy quarks. The correlation structures are fitted with a constant and two von Mises functions to obtain the baseline and the near- and away-side peaks, respectively. The results from p$-$Pb collisions are compared with those from pp collisions to study the effects of cold nuclear matter. In the measured trigger electron and associated particle kinematic regions, the two collision systems give consistent results. The $\Delta\varphi$ distribution and the peak observables in pp and p$-$Pb collisions are compared with calculations from various Monte Carlo event generators.
$\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 12$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ and $1 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm assoc} < 7$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV. The publication shows $\Delta\varphi$ distribution only for the ranges $1 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm assoc} < 2$, $2 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm assoc} < 3$, and $5 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm assoc} < 7$ ${\rm GeV}/c$.
$\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 12$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ and $1 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm assoc} < 7$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in p$\textendash$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV. The publication shows $\Delta\varphi$ distribution only for the ranges $1 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm assoc} < 2$, $2 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm assoc} < 3$, and $5 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm assoc} < 7$ ${\rm GeV}/c$.
Baseline of $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 12$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in pp and p$\textendash$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV. The publication shows $\Delta\varphi$ distribution only for the ranges $1 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm assoc} < 2$, $2 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm assoc} < 3$, and $5 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm assoc} < 7$ ${\rm GeV}/c$.
Baseline subtracted $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 12$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ and $1 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm assoc} < 7$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
Baseline subtracted $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 12$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ and $1 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm assoc} < 7$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in p$\textendash$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
Associated yield of near-side (NS) $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles as a function of $p_{\rm T}^{\rm{assoc}}$ for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 12$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in pp and p$\textendash$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
Associated yield of away-side (AS) $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles as a function of $p_{\rm T}^{\rm{assoc}}$ for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 12$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in pp and p$\textendash$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
Width of near-side (NS) $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles as a function of $p_{\rm T}^{\rm{assoc}}$ for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 12$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in pp and p$\textendash$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
Width of away-side (AS) $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles as a function of $p_{\rm T}^{\rm{assoc}}$ for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 12$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in pp and p$\textendash$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
Associated yield of near-side (NS) $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles as a function of $p_{\rm T}^{\rm{assoc}}$ for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 7$ and $7 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 16$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
Associated yield of away-side (AS) $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles as a function of $p_{\rm T}^{\rm{assoc}}$ for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 7$ and $7 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 16$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
Width of near-side (NS) $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles as a function of $p_{\rm T}^{\rm{assoc}}$ for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 7$ and $7 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 16$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
Width of away-side (AS) $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles as a function of $p_{\rm T}^{\rm{assoc}}$ for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 7$ and $7 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 16$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
Associated yield of near-side (NS) $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles as a function of $p_{\rm T}^{\rm{assoc}}$ for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 7$ and $7 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 16$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in p$\textendash$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
Associated yield of away-side (AS) $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles as a function of $p_{\rm T}^{\rm{assoc}}$ for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 7$ and $7 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 16$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in p--Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
Width of near-side (NS) $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles as a function of $p_{\rm T}^{\rm{assoc}}$ for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 7$ and $7 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 16$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in p$\textendash$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
Width of away-side (AS) $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles as a function of $p_{\rm T}^{\rm{assoc}}$ for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 7$ and $7 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 16$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in p$\textendash$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
Baseline subtracted $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 7$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ and $1 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm assoc} < 7$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
Baseline subtracted $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles for $7 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 16$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ and $1 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm assoc} < 7$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
Baseline subtracted $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles for $4 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 7$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ and $1 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm assoc} < 7$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in p$\textendash$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
Baseline subtracted $\Delta\varphi$ distribution between heavy-flavor decay electrons and associated charged particles for $7 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm e} < 16$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ and $1 < p_{\rm T}^{\rm assoc} < 7$ ${\rm GeV}/c$ in p$\textendash$Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm{NN}}} = 5.02$ TeV.
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
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<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 $N_{ch}^{rec}$ 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
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ 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
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Pb+Pb 5.02 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ 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< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<2.5, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <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 $N_{ch}^{rec}$ 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< $p_{T}$ <2.0 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
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <2.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{2}$ Three_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{3}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $\Sigma E_{T}$ based Centrality
$\rho_{4}$ Combined_subevent method, for Xe+Xe 5.44 TeV, $|\eta|$<1.0, 0.5< $p_{T}$ <5.0 GeV vs $N_{ch}^{rec}$ based Centrality
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 %.
The integrated elliptic flow of charged particles produced in Pb+Pb collisions at sqrt(s_NN)=2.76 TeV has been measured with the ATLAS detector using data collected at the Large Hadron Collider. The anisotropy parameter, v_2, was measured in the pseudorapidity range |eta| <= 2.5 with the event-plane method. In order to include tracks with very low transverse momentum pT, thus reducing the uncertainty in v_2 integrated over pT, a 1 mu b-1 data sample without a magnetic field in the tracking detectors is used. The centrality dependence of the integrated v_2 is compared to other measurements obtained with higher pT thresholds. A weak pseudorapidity dependence of the integrated elliptic flow is observed for central collisions, and a small decrease when moving away from mid-rapidity is observed only in peripheral collisions. The integrated v2 transformed to the rest frame of one of the colliding nuclei is compared to the lower-energy RHIC data.
Elliptic flow $v_{2}$ integrated over transverse momentum $p_{T}>p_{T,0}$ as a function of $p_{T,0}$ for 0-10% centrality interval, obtained with different charged-particle reconstruction methods: the tracklet (TKT) method with $p_{T,0}=0.07$ GeV, the pixel track (PXT) method with $p_{T,0} \geq 0.1$ GeV and the ID track (IDT) method with $p_{T,0}=0.5$ GeV. Error bars indicate statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Elliptic flow $v_{2}$ integrated over transverse momentum $p_{T}>p_{T,0}$ as a function of $p_{T,0}$ for 10-20% centrality interval, obtained with different charged-particle reconstruction methods: the tracklet (TKT) method with $p_{T,0}=0.07$ GeV, the pixel track (PXT) method with $p_{T,0} \geq 0.1$ GeV and the ID track (IDT) method with $p_{T,0}=0.5$ GeV. Error bars indicate statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Elliptic flow $v_{2}$ integrated over transverse momentum $p_{T}>p_{T,0}$ as a function of $p_{T,0}$ for 20-30% centrality interval, obtained with different charged-particle reconstruction methods: the tracklet (TKT) method with $p_{T,0}=0.07$ GeV, the pixel track (PXT) method with $p_{T,0} \geq 0.1$ GeV and the ID track (IDT) method with $p_{T,0}=0.5$ GeV. Error bars indicate statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Elliptic flow $v_{2}$ integrated over transverse momentum $p_{T}>p_{T,0}$ as a function of $p_{T,0}$ for 30-40% centrality interval, obtained with different charged-particle reconstruction methods: the tracklet (TKT) method with $p_{T,0}=0.07$ GeV, the pixel track (PXT) method with $p_{T,0} \geq 0.1$ GeV and the ID track (IDT) method with $p_{T,0}=0.5$ GeV. Error bars indicate statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Elliptic flow $v_{2}$ integrated over transverse momentum $p_{T}>p_{T,0}$ as a function of $p_{T,0}$ for 40-50% centrality interval, obtained with different charged-particle reconstruction methods: the tracklet (TKT) method with $p_{T,0}=0.07$ GeV, the pixel track (PXT) method with $p_{T,0} \geq 0.1$ GeV and the ID track (IDT) method with $p_{T,0}=0.5$ GeV. Error bars indicate statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Elliptic flow $v_{2}$ integrated over transverse momentum $p_{T}>p_{T,0}$ as a function of $p_{T,0}$ for 50-60% centrality interval, obtained with different charged-particle reconstruction methods: the tracklet (TKT) method with $p_{T,0}=0.07$ GeV, the pixel track (PXT) method with $p_{T,0} \geq 0.1$ GeV and the ID track (IDT) method with $p_{T,0}=0.5$ GeV. Error bars indicate statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Elliptic flow $v_{2}$ integrated over transverse momentum $p_{T}>p_{T,0}$ as a function of $p_{T,0}$ for 60-70% centrality interval, obtained with different charged-particle reconstruction methods: the tracklet (TKT) method with $p_{T,0}=0.07$ GeV, the pixel track (PXT) method with $p_{T,0} \geq 0.1$ GeV and the ID track (IDT) method with $p_{T,0}=0.5$ GeV. Error bars indicate statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Elliptic flow $v_{2}$ integrated over transverse momentum $p_{T}>p_{T,0}$ as a function of $p_{T,0}$ for 70-80% centrality interval, obtained with different charged-particle reconstruction methods: the tracklet (TKT) method with $p_{T,0}=0.07$ GeV, the pixel track (PXT) method with $p_{T,0} \geq 0.1$ GeV and the ID track (IDT) method with $p_{T,0}=0.5$ GeV. Error bars indicate statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Pseudorapidity dependence of elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, integrated over transverse momentum, $p_{T}$, for different charged particle reconstruction methods and different low-$p_{T}$ thresholds for the 0-10% centrality interval. Error bars indicate statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Pseudorapidity dependence of elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, integrated over transverse momentum, $p_{T}$, for different charged particle reconstruction methods and different low-$p_{T}$ thresholds for the 10-20% centrality interval. Error bars indicate statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Pseudorapidity dependence of elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, integrated over transverse momentum, $p_{T}$, for different charged particle reconstruction methods and different low-$p_{T}$ thresholds for the 20-30% centrality interval. Error bars indicate statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Pseudorapidity dependence of elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, integrated over transverse momentum, $p_{T}$, for different charged particle reconstruction methods and different low-$p_{T}$ thresholds for the 30-40% centrality interval. Error bars indicate statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Pseudorapidity dependence of elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, integrated over transverse momentum, $p_{T}$, for different charged particle reconstruction methods and different low-$p_{T}$ thresholds for the 40-50% centrality interval. Error bars indicate statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Pseudorapidity dependence of elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, integrated over transverse momentum, $p_{T}$, for different charged particle reconstruction methods and different low-$p_{T}$ thresholds for the 50-60% centrality interval. Error bars indicate statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Pseudorapidity dependence of elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, integrated over transverse momentum, $p_{T}$, for different charged particle reconstruction methods and different low-$p_{T}$ thresholds for the 60-70% centrality interval. Error bars indicate statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Pseudorapidity dependence of elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, integrated over transverse momentum, $p_{T}$, for different charged particle reconstruction methods and different low-$p_{T}$ thresholds for the 70-80% centrality interval. Error bars indicate statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Integrated elliptic flow, $v_{2}$, as a function of $|\eta| - y_{beam}$ for three centrality intervals Error bars indicate statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.
Measurements of charged-particle fragmentation functions of jets produced in ultra-relativistic nuclear collisions can provide insight into the modification of parton showers in the hot, dense medium created in the collisions. ATLAS has measured jets in $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 2.76$ TeV Pb+Pb collisions at the LHC using a data set recorded in 2011 with an integrated luminosity of 0.14 nb$^{-1}$. Jets were reconstructed using the anti-$k_{t}$ algorithm with distance parameter values $R$ = 0.2, 0.3, and 0.4. Distributions of charged-particle transverse momentum and longitudinal momentum fraction are reported for seven bins in collision centrality for $R=0.4$ jets with $p_{{T}}^{\mathrm{jet}}> 100$ GeV. Commensurate minimum $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ values are used for the other radii. Ratios of fragment distributions in each centrality bin to those measured in the most peripheral bin are presented. These ratios show a reduction of fragment yield in central collisions relative to peripheral collisions at intermediate $z$ values, $0.04 \lesssim z \lesssim 0.2$ and an enhancement in fragment yield for $z \lesssim 0.04$. A smaller, less significant enhancement is observed at large $z$ and large $p_{\mathrm{T}}$ in central collisions.
Differences of D(Z) distributions in different centralities with respect to peripheral events for R = 0.3 jets. The errors represent combined statistical and systematic uncertainties.
Differences of D(Z) distributions in different centralities with respect to peripheral events for R = 0.2 jets. The errors represent combined statistical and systematic uncertainties.
D(z) distribution for R=0.4 jets.
D(z) distribution for R=0.4 jets.
D(z) distribution for R=0.4 jets.
D(z) distribution for R=0.4 jets.
D(z) distribution for R=0.4 jets.
D(z) distribution for R=0.4 jets.
D(z) distribution for R=0.4 jets.
D(z) distribution for R=0.3 jets.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.4 jets for central to peripheral events.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.3 jets for central to peripheral events.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.
Ratio of D(z) distributions for R=0.2 jets for central to peripheral events.
Measurements of the centrality and rapidity dependence of inclusive jet production in $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}} = 5.02$ TeV proton--lead ($p$+Pb) collisions and the jet cross-section in $\sqrt{s} = 2.76$ TeV proton--proton collisions are presented. These quantities are measured in datasets corresponding to an integrated luminosity of 27.8 nb$^{-1}$ and 4.0 pb$^{-1}$, respectively, recorded with the ATLAS detector at the Large Hadron Collider in 2013. The $p$+Pb collision centrality was characterised using the total transverse energy measured in the pseudorapidity interval $-4.9 < \eta < -3.2$ in the direction of the lead beam. Results are presented for the double-differential per-collision yields as a function of jet rapidity and transverse momentum ($p_\mathrm{T}$) for minimum-bias and centrality-selected $p$+Pb collisions, and are compared to the jet rate from the geometric expectation. The total jet yield in minimum-bias events is slightly enhanced above the expectation in a $p_\mathrm{T}$-dependent manner but is consistent with the expectation within uncertainties. The ratios of jet spectra from different centrality selections show a strong modification of jet production at all $p_\mathrm{T}$ at forward rapidities and for large $p_\mathrm{T}$ at mid-rapidity, which manifests as a suppression of the jet yield in central events and an enhancement in peripheral events. These effects imply that the factorisation between hard and soft processes is violated at an unexpected level in proton-nucleus collisions. Furthermore, the modifications at forward rapidities are found to be a function of the total jet energy only, implying that the violations may have a simple dependence on the hard parton-parton kinematics.
Jet RpPb for 0-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 0-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 0-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 0-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 0-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 0-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 0-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 0-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +3.6 to +4.4 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +3.6 to +4.4 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +3.6 to +4.4 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.8 to +3.6 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.8 to +3.6 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.8 to +3.6 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +3.6 to +4.4 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.8 to +3.6 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +3.6 to +4.4 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.8 to +3.6 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +3.6 to +4.4 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.8 to +3.6 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +3.6 to +4.4 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.8 to +3.6 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +3.6 to +4.4 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.8 to +3.6 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RCP vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60%/60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 0-10% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 10-20% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 20-30% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 30-40% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 40-60% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +2.1 to +2.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +1.2 to +2.1 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.8 to +1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity +0.3 to +0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.3 to +0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -0.8 to -0.3 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -1.2 to -0.8 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
Jet RpPb vs. pT*cosh(y*) for 60-90% p+Pb events, within the centre of mass rapidity -2.1 to -1.2 (positive denotes downstream proton direction).
ATLAS measurements of the azimuthal anisotropy in lead-lead collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=2.76$ TeV are shown using a dataset of approximately 7 $\mu$b$^{-1}$ collected at the LHC in 2010. The measurements are performed for charged particles with transverse momenta $0.5<p_T<20$ GeV and in the pseudorapidity range $|\eta|<2.5$. The anisotropy is characterized by the Fourier coefficients, $v_n$, of the charged-particle azimuthal angle distribution for n = 2-4. The Fourier coefficients are evaluated using multi-particle cumulants calculated with the generating function method. Results on the transverse momentum, pseudorapidity and centrality dependence of the $v_n$ coefficients are presented. The elliptic flow, $v_2$, is obtained from the two-, four-, six- and eight-particle cumulants while higher-order coefficients, $v_3$ and $v_4$, are determined with two- and four-particle cumulants. Flow harmonics $v_n$ measured with four-particle cumulants are significantly reduced compared to the measurement involving two-particle cumulants. A comparison to $v_n$ measurements obtained using different analysis methods and previously reported by the LHC experiments is also shown. Results of measurements of flow fluctuations evaluated with multi-particle cumulants are shown as a function of transverse momentum and the collision centrality. Models of the initial spatial geometry and its fluctuations fail to describe the flow fluctuations measurements.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 0-2%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 2-5%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 5-10%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 10-15%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 15-20%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 20-25%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 25-30%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 30-35%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 35-40%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 40-45%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 45-50%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 50-55%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 55-60%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 60-80%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 0-2%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 2-5%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 5-10%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 10-15%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 15-20%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 20-25%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 25-30%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 30-35%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 35-40%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 40-45%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 45-50%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 50-55%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 55-60%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 60-80%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 2-5%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 5-10%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 10-15%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 15-20%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 20-25%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 25-30%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 30-35%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 35-40%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 40-45%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 45-50%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 50-55%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 55-60%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 60-80%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 2-5%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 5-10%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 10-15%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 15-20%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 20-25%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 25-30%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 30-35%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 35-40%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 40-45%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 45-50%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 50-55%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 55-60%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 60-80%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 2-5%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 5-10%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 10-15%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 15-20%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 20-25%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 25-30%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 30-35%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 35-40%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 40-45%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 45-50%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 50-55%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 55-60%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 60-80%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 5-10%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 15-20%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 25-30%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 35-40%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 40-50%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 10-20%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 20-30%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 30-40%.
The triangular flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 0-25%.
The triangular flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 0-25%.
The triangular flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 0-25%.
The triangular flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 25-60%.
The triangular flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 25-60%.
The triangular flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 25-60%.
The quadrangular flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 0-25%.
The quadrangular flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 0-25%.
The quadrangular flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 0-25%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 0-2%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 2-5%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 5-10%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 10-15%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 15-20%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 20-25%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 25-30%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 30-35%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 35-40%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 40-45%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 45-50%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 50-55%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 55-60%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 60-80%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 0-2%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 2-5%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 5-10%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 10-15%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 15-20%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 20-25%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 25-30%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 30-35%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 35-40%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 40-45%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 45-50%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 50-55%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 55-60%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 60-80%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 2-5%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 5-10%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 10-15%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 15-20%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 20-25%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 25-30%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 30-35%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 35-40%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 40-45%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 45-50%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 50-55%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 55-60%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 60-80%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 2-5%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 5-10%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 10-15%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 15-20%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 20-25%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 25-30%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 30-35%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 35-40%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 40-45%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 45-50%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 50-55%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 55-60%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 60-80%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 2-5%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 5-10%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 10-15%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 15-20%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 20-25%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 25-30%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 30-35%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 35-40%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 40-45%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 45-50%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 50-55%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 55-60%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 60-80%.
The triangular flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 0-60%.
The triangular flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 0-60%.
The triangular flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 0-60%.
The quadrangular flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 0-25%.
The quadrangular flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 0-25%.
The quadrangular flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of pseudorapidity in centrality bin 0-25%.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulats as a function of <Npart>.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of <Npart>.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of <Npart>.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of <Npart>.
The ratio of second flow harmonics measured with the six- and four-particle cumulants as a function of <Npart>.
The ratio of second flow harmonics measured with the eight- and four-particle cumulants as a function of <Npart>.
The second flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of <Npart>.
The triangular flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of <Npart>.
The triangular flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of <Npart>.
The triangular flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of <Npart>.
The quadrangular flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of <Npart>.
The quadrangular flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of <Npart>.
The quadrangular flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of <Npart>.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 2-5%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 5-10%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 10-15%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 15-20%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 20-25%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 25-30%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 30-35%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 35-40%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 40-45%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 45-50%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 50-55%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 55-60%.
The second flow harmonic fluctuations, F(v2), as a function of <Npart>.
The triangular flow harmonic fluctuations, F(v3), as a function of <Npart>.
The triangular flow harmonic fluctuations, F(v4), as a function of <Npart>.
The second flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulats as a function of <Npart>.
The second flow harmonic measured with the four-particle cumulats as a function of <Npart>.
The second flow harmonic measured with the six-particle cumulats as a function of <Npart>.
The second flow harmonic measured with the eight-particle cumulats as a function of <Npart>.
The ratio of second flow harmonics measured with the six- and four-particle cumulants as a function of <Npart>.
The ratio of second flow harmonics measured with the eight- and four-particle cumulants as a function of <Npart>.
The triangular flow harmonic measured with the two-particle cumulants as a function of <Npart>.
The quadrangular flow harmonic measured with the Event Plane method as a function of <Npart>.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{EP} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 2-5%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{EP} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 5-10%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{EP} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 10-15%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{EP} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 15-20%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{EP} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 20-25%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{EP} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 25-30%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{EP} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 30-35%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{EP} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 35-40%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{EP} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 40-45%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{EP} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 45-50%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{EP} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 50-55%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{EP} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 55-60%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{2} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 2-5%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{2} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 5-10%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{2} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 10-15%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{2} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 15-20%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{2} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 20-25%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{2} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 25-30%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{2} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 30-35%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{2} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 35-40%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{2} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 40-45%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{2} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 45-50%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{2} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 50-55%.
The second flow harmonic fluctiuations, F(v2), calculated from v2{2} and v2{4}, as a function of transverse momentum in centrality bin 55-60%.
The second flow harmonic fluctuations, F(v2), as a function of <Npart>.
The triangular flow harmonic fluctuations, F(v3), as a function of <Npart>.
The triangular flow harmonic fluctuations, F(v4), as a function of <Npart>.
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.