Slopes and intercepts of $<p_x>/<p_T>(\eta)$ in Cu+Au and Au+Au collisions.

Slopes and intercepts of $v_1(\eta)$ in Cu+Au and Au+Au collisions.

Centrality dependence of $v_1^{fluc(even)}$ and $<p_x>/<p_T>$ in Cu+Au and Au+Au collisions.

$p_T$ dependence of $v_1^{fluc(even)}$ and $v_1^{conv(odd)}$ in Cu+Au and Au+Au collisions.

$p_T$ dependence of $v_1$ measured with three-point correlator in Cu+Au collisions

$p_T$ dependence of $v_1$ measured with three-point correlator in Cu+Au collisions

$\eta$ dependence of $v_1$ measured with three-point correlator in Cu+Au collisions

Directed flow $v_1(p_T)$ of $\pi^+ + \pi^-$ in Cu+Au collisions.

Directed flow $v_1(p_T)$ of $K^++K^-$ in Cu+Au collisions.

Directed flow $v_1(p_T)$ of $p+\bar{p}$ in Cu+Au collisions.

Centrality dpendence of $<p_x>$ of positively and negatively charged particles and its differece in Cu+Au and Au+Au collisions.

Higher harmonic flow coefficients $v_n{\Psi_n}$ of charged particles for different centrality bins in Cu+Au collisions.

Higher harmonic flow coefficients of charged particles for different centrality bins in Cu+Au collisions.

Higher harmonic flow coefficients $v_n{\Psi_n}$ of charged particles for different centrality bins in Cu+Au collisions.

Higher harmonic flow coefficients $v_n$ of charged particles for two selected $p_T$ bins as a function of the number of participants calculated with a Monte-Carlo Glauber simulationin Cu+Au collisions.

Higher harmonic flow coefficients $v_n$ of charged particles for two selected $p_T$ bins as a function of the number of participants calculated with a Monte-Carlo Glauber simulationin Cu+Au collisions.

The second and third harmonic flow coefficients $v_n(p_T)$ of charged particles measured with the scalar product method for 0-5% and 20-30% centrality bins in Cu+Au collisions.

The second $v_2(p_T)$ harmonic flow coefficients of $\pi$ for different centrality bins in Cu+Au collisions.

The second $v_2(p_T)$ harmonic flow coefficients of p for different centrality bins in Cu+Au collisions.

The third $v_3(p_T)$ harmonic flow coefficients of $\pi$ for different centrality bins in Cu+Au collisions.

The third $v_3(p_T)$ harmonic flow coefficients of p for different centrality bins in Cu+Au collisions.

The second $v_2(p_T)$ and third $v_3(p_T)$ harmonic flow coefficients of K for different centrality bins in Cu+Au collisions.

Higher harmonic flow coefficients $v_2(p_T)$, $v_3(p_T)$, and $v_4(p_T)$ of $\pi$, K, and p for 0-40% centrality bin in Cu+Au collisions.

Higher harmonic flow coefficients $v_2(p_T)$, $v_3(p_T)$, and $v_4(p_T)$ of $\pi$, K, and p for 0-40% centrality bin in Cu+Au collisions.

Higher harmonic flow coefficients $v_2(p_T)$, $v_3(p_T)$, and $v_4(p_T)$ of $\pi$, K, and p for 0-40% centrality bin in Cu+Au collisions.

Higher harmonic flow coefficients $v_2(p_T)$, $v_3(p_T)$, and $v_4(p_T)$ of $\pi$, K, and p for 0-40% centrality bin in Cu+Au collisions.

Higher harmonic flow coefficients $v_2(p_T)$, $v_3(p_T)$, and $v_4(p_T)$ of $\pi$, K, and p for 0-40% centrality bin in Cu+Au collisions.

Higher harmonic flow coefficients $v_2(p_T)$, $v_3(p_T)$, and $v_4(p_T)$ of $\pi$, K, and p for 0-40% centrality bin in Cu+Au collisions.

Higher harmonic flow coefficients $v_2(p_T)$, $v_3(p_T)$, and $v_4(p_T)$ of $\pi$, K, and p for 0-40% centrality bin in Cu+Au collisions.

Higher harmonic flow coefficients $v_2(p_T)$, $v_3(p_T)$, and $v_4(p_T)$ of $\pi$, K, and p for 0-40% centrality bin in Cu+Au collisions.

Collins-like asymmetries as a function of particle-jet $p_T$.

Collins-like asymmetries as a function of particle-jet $p_T$.

Collins-like asymmetries as a function of pion $z$.

Collins-like asymmetries as a function of pion $z$.

Collins-like asymmetries as a function of pion $z$.

Collins-like asymmetries as a function of particle-jet $p_T$ for pions reconstructed with $0.1 < z < 0.3$.

Collins-like asymmetries as a function of pion $z$ for jets reconstructed with $6.0 < p_T < 13.8$ GeV/$c$.

Collins asymmetries as a function of particle-jet $p_T$.

Collins asymmetries as a function of particle-jet $p_T$.

Collins asymmetries as a function of particle-jet $p_T$.

Collins asymmetries as a function of pion $z$.

Collins asymmetries as a function of pion $z$.

Collins asymmetries as a function of pion $z$.

Collins asymmetries as a function of pion $j_T$ for jets reconstructed with $22.7 < p_T < 55.0$ GeV/$c$.

Collins asymmetries as a function of pion $j_T$ for jets reconstructed with $22.7 < p_T < 55.0$ GeV/$c$.

Collins asymmetries as a function of pion $j_T$ for jets reconstructed with $22.7 < p_T < 55.0$ GeV/$c$.

Collins asymmetries as a function of pion $z$ for jets reconstructed with $22.7 < p_T < 55.0$ GeV/$c$ and $0 < \eta < 1$.

Identified particle (Kaon Plus) RCP for RHIC BES energies. The colored shaded boxes describe the point-to-point systematic uncertainties. The uncertainty bands at unity on the right side of the plot correspond to the pT -independent uncertainty in Ncoll scaling with the color in the band corresponding to the color of the data points for that energy.

Identified particle (Kaon Minus) RCP for RHIC BES energies. The colored shaded boxes describe the point-to-point systematic uncertainties. The uncertainty bands at unity on the right side of the plot correspond to the pT -independent uncertainty in Ncoll scaling with the color in the band corresponding to the color of the data points for that energy.

Identified particle (Proton) RCP for RHIC BES energies. The colored shaded boxes describe the point-to-point systematic uncertainties. The uncertainty bands at unity on the right side of the plot correspond to the pT -independent uncertainty in Ncoll scaling with the color in the band corresponding to the color of the data points for that energy.

Identified particle (Antiproton) RCP for RHIC BES energies. The colored shaded boxes describe the point-to-point systematic uncertainties. The uncertainty bands at unity on the right side of the plot correspond to the pT -independent uncertainty in Ncoll scaling with the color in the band corresponding to the color of the data points for that energy.

Charged hadron Y(<Npart>) for two ranges of pT (pT 3.0 - 3.5 GeV/c). Statistical uncertainty bars are included, mostly smaller than point size, as well as shaded bands to indicate systematic uncertainties.

Charged hadron Y(<Npart>) for two ranges of pT (pT 4.0 - 4.5 GeV/c). Statistical uncertainty bars are included, mostly smaller than point size, as well as shaded bands to indicate systematic uncertainties.

Glauber Fit Parameters

Nch at each Collision Energy (GeV)

Ncoll at each Collision Energy (GeV)

Npart at each Collision Energy (GeV)

The value of $\sigma^{NN}_{inel}$ used in the Monte Carlo Glauber simulation at each collision energy

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

Charged hadron $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\\p$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\overline{p}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$K^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$K^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\pi^{+}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 7.7 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 11.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 14.5 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 19.6 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 27 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 39 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

$\pi^{-}$ $\frac{1}{2\pi p_{T}}$ * $\frac{d^{2}N}{d\eta dp_{T}}$ $\pm$ stat. $\pm$ sys. $(GeV/c)^{-2}$ for $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62.4 GeV/c

(a) Centrality dependence of $v^{even}_{1}$ for $0.4 \lt p_{T} \lt 0.7$ GeV/c for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}} = 200, 39$ and $19.6$ GeV; (b) $K$ vs. $\langle N_{ch} \rangle^{-1}$ for the $v^{even}_{1}$ values shown in (a). The $\langle N_{ch} \rangle$ values correspond to the centrality intervals indicated in panel (a).

Comparison of the $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}$ dependence of $v^{even}_{1}$ and $v_3$ for $0.4 \lt p_{T} \lt 0.7$ GeV/c in 0-10 central Au+Au collisions.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $p$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $p$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{p}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{p}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{p}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{p}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{+}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{+}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{+}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{+}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{-}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\Lambda$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{-}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\Lambda$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{-}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\Lambda$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\pi^{-}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\Lambda$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{+}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39 and 62.4 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K^{-}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39 and 62.4 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $K_0^s$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39 and 62.4 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\Lambda$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\Lambda$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.

Directed flow slope $dv_1/dy$ as a function of beam energy in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\Lambda$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 GeV.

Directed flow slope $dv_1/dy$ as a function of beam energy in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\Lambda$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow slope $dv_1/dy$ as a function of beam energy in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow slope $dv_1/dy$ as a function of beam energy in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 62.4 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\bar{\Lambda}$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39 and 62.4 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 5%–10% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39 and 62.4 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 7.7 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39 and 62.4 GeV.

Directed flow $v_1$ as a function of rapidity $y$ for $\phi$ in 40%–80% central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} =$ 200 GeV.

Directed flow slope $dv_1/dy$ as a function of beam energy in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions.

Directed flow slope $dv_1/dy$ as a function of beam energy in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions.

Directed flow slope $dv_1/dy$ as a function of beam energy in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions.

Directed flow slope $dv_1/dy$ as a function of beam energy in 10%–40% central Au+Au collisions.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (d) K− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (c) K+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (f) p¯ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (e) p in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (b) π− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (a) π+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (d) K− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (c) K+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (f) p¯ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (e) p in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (b) π− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (a) π+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (d) K− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (c) K+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (f) p¯ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (e) p in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (b) π− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (a) π+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (d) K− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (c) K+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (f) p¯ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (e) p in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (b) π− in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (a) π+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (d) k- in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (c) k+ in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (f) pbar in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) transverse momentum spectra for (e) p in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for different centralities. The spectra for centralities other than 0–5% are scaled for clarity as shown in the figure. The curves represent the Bose-Einstein, mT -exponential, and double-exponential function fits to 0–5% central data for pions, kaons, and (anti)protons, respectively. The uncertainties are statistical and systematic added in quadrature.

Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For clarity, ⟨Npart⟩ uncertainties are not added in quadrature.

Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For clarity, ⟨Npart⟩ uncertainties are not added in quadrature.

Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For clarity, ⟨Npart⟩ uncertainties are not added in quadrature.

Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For clarity, ⟨Npart⟩ uncertainties are not added in quadrature.

Centrality dependence of dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties. For clarity, ⟨Npart⟩ uncertainties are not added in quadrature.

Centrality dependences of <pT> for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7 GeV. Errors shown are quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Centrality dependences of <pT> for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 11.5 GeV. Errors shown are quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Centrality dependences of <pT> for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 19.6 GeV. Errors shown are quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Centrality dependences of <pT> for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 27 GeV. Errors shown are quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Centrality dependences of <pT> for π+, π−, K+, K−, p, and p ̄ at midrapidity (|y|<0.1) in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV. Errors shown are quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of K−/π−, p ̄/π−, K+/π+, and p/π+ ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 7.7 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of K−/π−, p ̄/π−, K+/π+, and p/π+ ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 11.5 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of K−/π−, p ̄/π−, K+/π+, and p/π+ ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 19.6 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of K−/π−, p ̄/π−, K+/π+, and p/π+ ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 27 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

Variation of K−/π−, p ̄/π−, K+/π+, and p/π+ ratios as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in Au+Au collisions at 39 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

The midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) dN/dy normalized by ⟨Npart⟩/2 as a function of √sNN for π±, K±, and p and p ̄ in 0–5% Au+Au collisions at BES energies. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

⟨mT⟩ − m of π±, K±, and p and p ̄ as a function of √sNN . Midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) results are shown for 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at BES energies. The errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

π−/π+, K−/K+, and p ̄/p ratios at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) in central 0–5% Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

K/π ratio at midrapidity (|y| < 0.1) for central 0–5% Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 11.5, 19.6, 27, and 39 GeV. Errors shown are the quadrature sum of statistical and systematic uncertainties where the latter dominates.

The GCE model particle yields fits shown along with standard deviations for Au+Au 7.7 and Au+Au 39 GeV in 0–5% central collisions. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.

The GCE model particle ratios fits shown along with standard deviations for Au+Au 7.7 and Au+Au 39 GeV in 0–5% central collisions. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.

The SCE model particle yields fits shown along with standard deviations for Au+Au 7.7 and Au+Au 39 GeV in 0–5% central collisions. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.

The SCE model particle ratios fits shown along with standard deviations for Au+Au 7.7 and Au+Au 39 GeV in 0–5% central collisions. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature.

Chemical freeze-out parameter γS plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in GCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Chemical freeze-out parameter μB plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in GCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Chemical freeze-out parameter μS plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in GCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Chemical freeze-out parameter Tch plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in GCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Chemical freeze-out parameter R plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in GCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter γS between results from particle yield fits to particle ratio fits in GCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter μB between results from particle yield fits to particle ratio fits in GCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter μS between results from particle yield fits to particle ratio fits in GCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter Tch between results from particle yield fits to particle ratio fits in GCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Chemical freeze-out parameter γS plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in SCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Chemical freeze-out parameter μB plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in SCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Chemical freeze-out parameter Tch plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in SCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Chemical freeze-out parameter R plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩ in SCE for particle yields fit. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter γS between yield and ratio fits in SCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter μB between yield and ratio fits in SCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter Tch between yield and ratio fits in SCE plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter γS between GCE and SCE results using particle ratios in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter μB between GCE and SCE results using particle ratios in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter Tch between GCE and SCE results using particle ratios in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter γS between GCE and SCE results using particle yields in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter μB between GCE and SCE results using particle yields in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter Tch between GCE and SCE results using particle yields in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Ratio of chemical freeze-out parameter R between GCE and SCE results using particle yields in fits plotted vs ⟨Npart⟩. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Extracted chemical freeze-out temperature vs baryon chemical potential for (a) GCE and (b) SCE cases using particle yields as input for fitting. Curves represent two model predictions [81,82]. The gray bands represent the theoretical prediction ranges of the Cleymans et al. model [81]. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Extracted chemical freeze-out temperature vs baryon chemical potential for (a) GCE and (b) SCE cases using particle yields as input for fitting. Curves represent two model predictions [81,82]. The gray bands represent the theoretical prediction ranges of the Cleymans et al. model [81]. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

Extracted chemical freeze-out temperature vs baryon chemical potential for (a) GCE and (b) SCE cases using particle yields as input for fitting. Curves represent two model predictions [81,82]. The gray bands represent the theoretical prediction ranges of the Cleymans et al. model [81]. Uncertainties represent systematic errors.

"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on constraints: Extracted chemical freeze-out temperatures shown in panels (a), (c), and (e) and baryon chemical potentials shown in panels (b), (d), and (f) for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting, respectively, for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 7.7, 19.6, and 39 GeV. Results are compared for three initial conditions: μQ = 0, μQ constrained to B/2Q value, and μQ constrained to B/2Q along with μS constrained to 0. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on including more particles: Extracted chemical freeze-out parameters (a) Tch, (b) μB, and (c) γS along with (d) χ2/ndf for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting. Results are compared for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for four different sets of particle yields used in fitting. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on including more particles: Extracted chemical freeze-out parameters (a) Tch, (b) μB, and (c) γS along with (d) χ2/ndf for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting. Results are compared for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for four different sets of particle yields used in fitting. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on including more particles: Extracted chemical freeze-out parameters (a) Tch, (b) μB, and (c) γS along with (d) χ2/ndf for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting. Results are compared for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for four different sets of particle yields used in fitting. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Choice on including more particles: Extracted chemical freeze-out parameters (a) Tch, (b) μB, and (c) γS along with (d) χ2/ndf for GCE using particle yields as input for fitting. Results are compared for Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 39 GeV for four different sets of particle yields used in fitting. Uncertainties represent systematic errors."

"Blast wave model fits of π±, K±, p and p p¯ T spectra in 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = (a) 7.7, (b) 11.5, (c) 19.6, (d) 27, and (e) 39 GeV. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature. Here, the uncertainties are smaller than the symbol size."

"Blast wave model fits of π±, K±, p and p p¯ T spectra in 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = (a) 7.7, (b) 11.5, (c) 19.6, (d) 27, and (e) 39 GeV. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature. Here, the uncertainties are smaller than the symbol size."

"Blast wave model fits of π±, K±, p and p p¯ T spectra in 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = (a) 7.7, (b) 11.5, (c) 19.6, (d) 27, and (e) 39 GeV. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature. Here, the uncertainties are smaller than the symbol size."

"Blast wave model fits of π±, K±, p and p p¯ T spectra in 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = (a) 7.7, (b) 11.5, (c) 19.6, (d) 27, and (e) 39 GeV. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature. Here, the uncertainties are smaller than the symbol size."

"Blast wave model fits of π±, K±, p and p p¯ T spectra in 0–5% central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = (a) 7.7, (b) 11.5, (c) 19.6, (d) 27, and (e) 39 GeV. Uncertainties on experimental data represent statistical and systematic uncertainties added in quadrature. Here, the uncertainties are smaller than the symbol size."

"Variation of Tkin with <β> for different energies and centralities. The centrality increases from left to right for a given energy. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,66]. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."

"Variation of Tkin with <β> for different energies and centralities. The centrality increases from left to right for a given energy. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,66]. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."

"Variation of Tkin with <β> for different energies and centralities. The centrality increases from left to right for a given energy. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,66]. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."

"Variation of Tkin with <β> for different energies and centralities. The centrality increases from left to right for a given energy. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,66]. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."

"Variation of Tkin with <β> for different energies and centralities. The centrality increases from left to right for a given energy. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,66]. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."

" (a) Energy dependence of kinetic and chemical freezeout temperatures for central heavy-ion collisions. The curves represent various theoretical predictions [81,82]. (b) Energy dependence of average transverse radial flow velocity for central heavy-ion collisions. The data points other than BES energies are taken from Refs. [43,53–64,66] and references therein. The BES data points are for 0–5% central collisions, AGS energies are mostly for 0–5%, SPS energies are for mostly 0–7%, and top RHIC and LHC energies are for 0–5% central collisions. Uncertainties represent systematic uncertainties."

The ratio $|C/A|$ of amplitudes of $\omega$ and $\rho^0$ mesons.

$d\sigma/dy$ for exclusively photoproduced $\rho^0$ mesons in $Xn\,Xn$ events.

$d\sigma/dy$ for exclusively photoproduced $\rho^0$ mesons in the previous STAR analysis, Phys. Rev. C 77 034910 (2008).

$d\sigma/dy$ for exclusively photoproduced $\rho^0$ mesons in $1n\,1n$ events.

The $-t$ distribution for exclusive $\rho^0$ mesons in events with $Xn\,Xn$ mutual event dissociation.

The $-t$ distribution for exclusive $\rho^0$ mesons in events with $1n\,1n$ mutual event dissociation.

$d\sigma/dt$ for coherent $\rho^0$ photoproduction in $Xn\,Xn$ events

$d\sigma/dt$ for coherent $\rho^0$ photoproduction in $1n\,1n$ events

The target distribution in the transverse plane, the result of a two-dimensional Fourier transform (Hankel transform) of the $1n\, 1n$ diffraction pattern shown in Fig. 8. The integration is limied to the region $|t| < 0.06 (\textrm{GeV}/c)^2$. The uncertainty is estimated by changing the maximum $-t$ to 0.05, 0.07, and 0.09 $(\textrm{GeV}/c)^2$

The target distribution in the transverse plane, the result of a two-dimensional Fourier transform (Hankel transform) of the $Xn\, Xn$ diffraction pattern shown in Fig. 8. The integration is limied to the region $|t| < 0.06 (\textrm{GeV}/c)^2$. The uncertainty is estimated by changing the maximum $-t$ to 0.05, 0.07, and 0.09 $(\textrm{GeV}/c)^2$

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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