A systematic analysis of transverse momentum spectra of
mesons
in high energy collisions
Abstract
Abstract: We aggregate the transverse momentum
spectra of mesons produced in high energy gold-gold
(Au-Au), deuteron-gold (-Au), lead-lead (Pb-Pb), proton-lead
(-Pb), and proton-(anti)proton (-)
collisions measured by several collaborations at the Relativistic
Heavy Ion collider (RHIC), the Tevatron Proton-Antiproton
Collider, and the Large Hadron Collider (LHC). The collision
energy (the center-of-mass energy) gets involved in a large range
from dozens of GeV to 13 TeV (the top LHC energy). We consider two
participant or contributor partons, a charm quark and an
anti-charm quark, in the production of . The probability
density of each quark is described by means of the modified
Tsallis–Pareto-type function (the TP-like function) while
considering that both quarks make suitable contributions to the
transverse momentum spectrum. Therefore, the convolution
of two TP-like functions is applied to represent the
spectrum. We adopt the mentioned convolution function to fit the
experimental data and find out the trends of the power exponent,
effective temperature, and of the revised index with changing the
centrality, rapidity, and collision energy. Beyond that, we
capture the characteristic of spectrum, which is of great
significance to better understand the production mechanism of
in high energy collisions.
Keywords: Transverse momentum spectrum, meson,
TP-like function, convolution
PACS: 12.40.Ee, 13.85.Hd, 24.10.Pa
I Introduction
Quantum chromodynamics (QCD) is the standard dynamics theory and an important part of the standard model, which is applicable in the study of heavy quark pair production and correlation 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6 such as the transverse momentum spectra, nuclear modification factor, azimuthal correlation, anisotropic flow, and so on. QCD is a kind of non-Abelian gauge field theory 6a, which implies that the strong interactions between quarks have three basic characteristics. Firstly, it can explain the asymptotic freedom characteristics proposed in the inelastic electron-proton and electron-deuteron scattering 6b. Secondly, it can explain the color confinement which shows quarks and anti-quarks cannot be separated due to very strong interactions. Lastly, it can explain the spontaneous break of the symmetry of the chirality. Understanding these characteristics is of great necessity for researchers to study the interactions among particles and their mechanisms of evolution, structure, and decay 6c; 6d; 6e; 6f; 6g.
The heavy flavor quarkonium is a bound state formed by the heavy flavor quark and anti-quark 7. It plays an important role in the theoretical research of QCD. In hadron induced high energy collisions, the generation of heavy quarkonium can be divided into two processes: One is the appearance of heavy quark pairs and the other one is the evolution of heavy quark pairs into hadrons. The former process can be calculated and analyzed by the perturbative QCD theory 9a; 9b; 9c. Particularly, due to the peculiar reason of the heavy quarkonium, in which the relativistic effect can be neglected, some special theories such as the non-relativistic QCD theory 9d; 9e; 9f can be used to calculate and analyze the production process.
As the basic theory of strong interactions of particles 1; 2; 3; 4; 5; 6, QCD predicts that the hadronic matter can be heated to a very high temperature when it experiences very strong interactions. Then, the system will go through a phase transition from the hadron matter to quark-gluon plasma (QGP) in the process 10; 11; 12. The experiment of relativistic heavy ion collisions is the only way of achieving a QCD phase transition in laboratory conditions 12a; 12b; 12c. Nevertheless, the lifetime of the produced QGP experiencing this phase transition can only reach the order of 10 fm/ (from a few to dozens of fm/) 12d; 12e, which cannot be directly observed in experiments. To detect QGP and study its properties, one has to use an indirect method. For example, one may study the spectrum properties of heavy quarkoniums to obtain the excitation degree (temperature) of emission source which is related to the information on QGP.
meson is the bound state of charm and anti-charm () quarks, where the constituent mass of charm quark is about 1.6 GeV/ 7. As the first heavy quarkonium discovered experimentally, it has been extensively studied in high energy collisions. In addition, the constraint of is considered as an important signal for the generation of QGP 13; 14; 15; 15a; 15b. The yield of in electron-positron collisions is higher than that in nuclear collisions 15c; 15d, so the decay of in nuclear collisions is an ideal way and medium for studying the hadron spectrum and finding new particles. meson is a bound state of bottom and anti-bottom () quarks, where the constituent mass of bottom quark is about 4.6 GeV/ 7. The masses of both and are very large, which leads to the change scale of energy (momentum) in the collision process to the order of GeV (GeV/) when we study their structural properties. In addition, and can form new and respectively, which can be researched by non-relativistic approach 9d; 9e; 9f.
We note that the theories and models based on QCD and related idea are complex in the calculation process 9a; 9b; 9c; 9d; 9e; 9f. The complex calculation limits the applications of these theories and models in comparison with experimental data. We hope that we could use a simple idea and formalism to describe uniformly the spectra of various particles, in particular the spectra of heavy quarkoniums such as due to its abundant early production in the collisions and wide transverse momentum distribution. In the framework of the multi-source thermal model 16; 17; 18; 18a, we have used the idea of quark composition describing tentatively and uniformly the spectra of various particles in our recent work 64; 64a. It is interesting for us to test further the idea systematically, but the idea of two contributor quarks or partons is used due to the fact that some particles such as leptons have no quark composition. Of course, the quark composition and two contributor quarks for heavy quarkoniums are the same.
In this paper, we test systematically the idea of two contributor partons which contribute to the transverse momentum spectrum of . The experimental data are collected from gold-gold (Au-Au) 19; 20, deuteron-gold (-Au) 21, lead-lead (Pb-Pb) 22; 23, proton-lead (-Pb) 24; 25; 26; 27, and proton-(anti)proton (-) collisions 28; 29; 30; 31; 32; 33; 34; 35; 36; 37; 38 over an energy range from dozens of GeV at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) to 13 TeV at the Larger Hadron Collider (LHC). Among the RHIC and LHC, there is the Tevatron Proton-Antiproton Collider from which we cited the data in - collisions at 1.96 TeV. These studies are useful for us to understand one of the three basic characteristics of QCD, the color confinement due to the very strong interactions among quarks and anti-quarks.
II Formalism and method
According to the multi-source thermal model 16; 17; 18; 18a, we may think that a few emission sources are formed in high energy collisions. For nuclear fragments from the projectile and target in nucleus-nucleus collisions, the sources can be nucleons and nucleon clusters. For produced particles such as pions, kaons, and , the sources can be participant or contributor quarks or gluons, though the contributors may be from gluon fusion at the first. The properties of sources can be described by different statistics such as the Boltzmann-Gibbs, Fermi-Dirac, Bose-Einstein, and Tsallis statistics. There are some relations among these statistics due to the fact that they may result in similar or different distributions while describing the spectra of particles.
The Tsallis distribution describes the transverse momentum () spectra in wider range than the Boltzmann-Gibbs distribution, though the former is derived from the latter 39; 40; 41. Also, the latter is a special case of the former in which the entropy index . Indeed, the former is widely used in high energy collisions from a few GeV to 13 TeV (the top LHC energy) to parameterize the spectrum of final-state particles, which justifies its usage in the present work. The form of the Tsallis distribution is expressed as 42; 43; 44; 45; 46; 47; 48
(1) |
Here, , , , , , , , and denote the energy, momentum, particle number, rapidity, rest mass, transverse mass, power exponent, and effective temperature, respectively. The transverse mass is given by 49; 50; 51; 52; 53; 54. In particular, , and the entropy index describes the degree of equilibrium. The closer the parameter to 1, the more equilibrated the emission source is.
According to the form of Tsallis distribution Eq. (1), as , can be ignored, followed by . Then it can be observed that the particles are distributed in accordance with the inverse power law. This is the distribution type of particles produced by the hard scattering process in the high energy collision process 55; 56; 57; 58 and in high region. In the non-relativistic limit condition, there is , showing , where is the transverse energy in the non-relativistic limit. We call this distribution the thermodynamic statistical distribution, that is the Boltzmann distribution. Here, we have only discussed the two special cases ( and ), though they are not used by us in the present work.
Usually, the empirical formula, the Tsallis–Pareto-type function, is adopted to outline the spectrum 59; 60; 61; 62; 63. The general form of the mentioned function is
(2) |
which is equivalent to Eq. (1) in the form of probability density function, where is the parameter dependent normalization constant. As the probability density function, Eq. (2) is normalized as . In Eq. (2), and reflect the degrees of non-equilibrium and excitation of the source respectively. Larger corresponds to more equilibrium, and larger corresponds to higher excitation.
In the lower range, due to the contribution of light flavor resonance decay, Eq. (2) cannot describe the spectra of light particles very well. For , the feed-down contribution is more complicated, which is minimal at low and grows with growing . This renders that Eq. (2) also fails to describe the spectra. As a result, we ought to empirically add a revised index on to modify Eq. (2). Then the revised Eq. (2) becomes 64; 64a; 65
(3) |
Both the normalization constants in Eqs. (2) and (3) are different, though we have used the same symbol. The two constants are also the parameter dependent. Compared to Eq. (2), Eq. (3) can be used to describe the spectrum in the entire transverse momentum range, having a broader application. For purpose of convenience, as in refs. 64; 64a; 65, we also call Eq. (3) the TP-like function in this work. In the TP-like function, the meanings of and remain unchanged as what they are in Eq. (2), though their values may be changed.
The discovery of provides a direct evidence for the existence of charm quarks, which makes the study of hadron structure theory presenting a new situation. We may think that in the formation of there are two participant or contributor (anti-)charm quarks taking part in the collisions. Let and denote the contributions of quarks 1 and 2 to the transverse momentum of respectively. The probability density function () obeyed by () is assumed to be Eq. (3). We have
(4) |
(5) |
Here, the two normalization constants and are parameter dependent. and are the constituent masses of quarks 1 and 2 respectively, both are 1.6 GeV/ for charm and anti-charm quarks 7 used in this work. Because of the two quarks taking part in the same collisions, the parameters , , and in Eqs. (4) and (5) are separately the same.
The transverse momentum distribution of is given by the convolution of two TP-like functions 64; 64a; 65. We have
(6) |
where the functions and , as well as the parameters , , and , are given in Eqs. (4) and (5). It should be noted that we have used two contributors. The convolution of two-parton contributions is applicable even for the spectra of particles with complex quark composition. For example, we may use the convolution of two-parton contributions fitting the spectra of various jets 65. As the probability density function, Eq. (6) is applicable in high energy collisions with small or large system, no matter what the density of produced particles is. In addition, Eq. (6) results in similar curve as Eqs. (4) and (5) with different parameters 64; 64a, though the form of Eq. (6) is more complex due to the convolution.
In the above discussions, we assume that , which is operated to describe the relationship among of , and contributed by quarks 1 and 2, respectively. This treatment assumes the azimuth angle of vector being equal to the azimuth angle of vector . More generally 64; 64a; 66, if , we have . In particular, if is perpendicular to , i.e. , we have . If is opposite to , i.e. , we have . Our explorations show that the relationship of due to , i.e. Eq. (6) based on Eqs. (4) and (5), is more easy to fit the data.
If we assume other relationships, Eq. (6) is not applicable. Thus, we need to explore new form of Eq. (3), which is also the topic for us 66; 67. If the analytical expression of Eq. (6) is not available for other relationships, the Monte Carlo method can be used to obtain , , and . The distribution is then obtained from the statistics. For example, for the more general case of , we have the expression of . This expression can be extended to the case of three or more contributor partons if we add the third or more items in the components. For the special case of , the analytical expression of Eq. (6) is changed 66; 67, and the form of Eq. (3) is also changed 67. For the special case of , the analytical expression of Eq. (6) is applicable, though the form of Eq. (3) is not applicable. In the calculation, the conservations of energy and momentum should be satisfied naturally.
It is understandable that we use in the present work. From the point of view of energy, we have the relationship among the energy of , , where and are energies contributed by quarks 1 and 2, respectively. In term of transverse mass and rapidity, we have the relationship , where , , denotes the mass of quark 1, denotes the mass of quark 2, denotes the rapidity of quark 1, and denotes the rapidity of quark 2. In the given narrow rapidity range and neglecting the mass, we have approximately .
Although the case of is a special one, the relationship of and the convolution of two TP-like functions can fit easily the spectra of various particles and jets 64; 64a; 65. From our point of view, we do not think that the more general case of and the special cases of and are more easy to fit the spectra due to the calculation itself, though the idea is practicable. In particular, from the point of view of the contributor partons, but not the constituent quarks, the spectra of leptons and jets can be easily fitted from the relationship of and the convolution of two TP-like functions 64; 64a; 65. This confirms the validity of Eq. (6) based on two contributor sources in the framework of multi-source thermal model 16; 17; 18; 18a.
We would like to emphasize here that we have used two contributor partons as the projectile and target particles/nuclei, no matter what the final-state products are 64; 64a; 65. For , the two contributor partons (charm and anti-charm quarks) and the constituent quarks are coincidentally equal to each other. For baryons, the two contributor partons are not equal to the three constituent quarks. For jets, the two contributor partons are not equal to the sets of two or three constituent quarks, too. For leptons, the two contributor partons have no corresponding constituent quarks. We may consider that two light or slow contributor partons produce leptons and baryons, while two heavy or fast contributor partons produce jets, no matter what the structures of leptons, baryons, and jets are. In fact, the two contributor partons are regarded as two energy resources, but not the constituents.
III Results and discussion
III.1 Comparison with data
Figure 1 shows the transverse momentum spectra, , of produced in Au-Au collisions at center-of-mass energy per nucleon pair (a) 39, (b) 62.4, and (c–e) 200 GeV, where denotes the branching ratio. The symbols in panels (a–c) represent the experimental data of spectra measured by the STAR Collaboration 19 in the mid-rapidity interval of and in the centrality class of 0–60 and its subclasses of 0–20, 20–40, and 40–60. The symbols in panels (d) and (e) represent the experimental data of spectra measured by the PHENIX Collaboration 20 in the rapidity intervals of (d) and (e) and in the centrality classes of 0–20, 20–40, 40–60, and 60–92. Some data sets are scaled by multiplying or dividing different values marked in the panels for clear indication. The solid curves are our fitting results by using the convolution of two TP-like functions, i.e. Eq. (6) based on Eqs. (4) and (5). For comparison, the dot-dashed curves are our results refitted by Eq. (6) with . The values of fitting parameters , , and are listed in Table 1 with the normalization constant , , and the number of degree of freedom (ndof). We use to characterize the fitting deviation between the experimental data and our fit function and curve. For the given data and fit function, the smaller , the better the fitting result, and the closer to the experimental results. If , it is rounded to 1 or a decimal fraction; Otherwise, it is rounded to an integer. In the case of ndof is less than or equal to 0, we use to mention in the table. One can see that the mentioned function with changeable fits satisfactorily the experimental data in Au-Au collisions measured by the STAR and PHENIX Collaborations at the RHIC, though in many cases the fits with are comparable to those with changeable .
Similar to Figure 1, Figure 2 shows the transverse momentum spectra, , of produced in -Au collisions at 200 GeV. The symbols represent the experimental data measured by the PHENIX Collaboration 21. Panels (a) and (b) show the spectra of at the backward rapidity of and the forward rapidity of respectively, with the centrality classes of 0–20, 20–40, 40–60, and 60–88. Panel (c) shows the spectra of at mid-rapidity with the same centrality classes as panels (a) and (b). Panel (d) shows the spectra in minimum-bias collisions with rapidity intervals of , , and . The solid curves are our fitting results by Eq. (6), and the dot-dashed curves are our results refitted by Eq. (6) with . The values of fitting parameters are listed in Table 2 with , , and ndof. One can see that the mentioned function with changeable fits satisfactorily the experimental data in -Au collisions measured by the PHENIX Collaboration at the RHIC. In many cases, the fits with obtain several times larger than those with changeable .
The transverse momentum spectra, , of produced in Pb-Pb collisions at (a) 2.76 TeV and (b) 5.02 TeV in the rapidity interval are displayed in Figure 3, where denotes the yields. The symbols represent the experimental data measured by the ALICE Collaboration 22; 23. Panel (a) shows the spectra for three centrality classes, 0–20, 20–40, and 40–90. Panel (b) shows the spectra for seven centrality classes, 0–10%, 10–20%, 20–30%, 30–40%, 40–50%, 50–60%, and 60–90%. The sold (dot-dashed) curves are our fitting results by Eq. (6) (with ). The values of fitting parameters are listed in Table 3 with other information. One can see that Eq. (6) (with changeable ) fits satisfactorily the experimental data in Pb-Pb collisions measured by the ALICE Collaboration at the LHC. In many cases, the fits with obtain several times larger than those with changeable .
The transverse momentum spectra, (a, b, i, and j) or (c–h) , of (a, c, e, and g) prompt , (b) from , (d, f, and h) nonprompt , or (i and j) inclusive produced in -Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV are given in Figure 4. As can be seen in the figure, panels (a–h) show the spectra for different rapidity intervals, while panels (i) and (j) show the spectra for given rapidity interval and different centrality classes. The symbols in panels (a and b), (c–f), (g and h), as well as (i and j) represent the experimental data measured by the LHCb 24, CMS 25, ATLAS 26, and ALICE Collaborations 27, respectively. The solid (dot-dashed) curves are our fitting results by Eq. (6) (with ). The values of fitting parameters are listed in Table 4. It should be noted here that, in Figures 4(d), 4(f), and 4(h), although nonprompt is produced from the fragmentation of open bottom hadron, it is also regarded as two contributors due to the fact that open bottom hadron has two contributors. This is similar to the view of point of string, in which two contributors form a string. Then, the string is broken to produce a particle, and the particle has two contributors. From Figure 4 one can see that Eq. (6) (with changeable ) fits satisfactorily the experimental data in -Pb collisions measured by several collaborations at the LHC. In many cases, the fits with obtain several times larger than those with changeable .
In Figure 5, we show the transverse momentum spectra, (a–c and g–j) , (d and e) , (f) , and (k–p) in - collisions at center-of-mass energy (a) 200, (b) 500, and (c) 510 GeV, as well as (d) 1.8, (e) 1.96, (f) 2.76, (g) 5.02, and (h) 5.02 TeV, with different or (pseudorapidity) and other selection conditions marked in the panels. The data symbols in panels (a), (b and c), (d and e), (f), (g–j), and (k–p) are quoted from the PHENIX 28; 29; 30, STAR 31, CDF 32; 33, LHCb 34 and ALICE 35, CMS 25, and LHCb Collaborations 36; 37; 38, respectively. The solid (dot-dashed) curves are our fitting results by Eq. (6) (with ). The values of fitting parameters are listed in Table 5. One can see that Eq. (6) (with changeable ) fits satisfactorily the experimental data in - collisions measured by several collaborations at the RHIC, Tevatron, and LHC. In many cases, the fits with obtain several times larger than those with changeable .
![[Uncaptioned image]](https://cdn.awesomepapers.org/papers/3a222a20-6e66-4aa1-bfa8-abf5b6a1cb3e/x1.png)
Figure 1. Transverse momentum spectra, , of produced in high energy Au-Au collisions with various centralities. Different symbols in panels (a–c) show the spectra measured by the STAR Collaboration 19 at (a) 39, (b) 62.4, and (c) 200 GeV with . Panels (d) and (e) are the spectra measured by the PHENIX Collaboration 20 at 200 GeV with and respectively. The solid curves are our fitting results by using Eq. (6) (with changeable ), and the dot-dashed curves are our results refitted by Eq. (6) with unchangeable .
Table 1. Left panel: Values of , , , , , and ndof corresponding to the solid curves in Figure 1 for Au-Au collisions. Right panel: Values of , , , , and ndof corresponding to the dot-dashed curves in Figure 1 for Au-Au collisions, in which .
Figure | Collab. | (GeV) | Selection | (GeV) | /ndof | (GeV) | /ndof | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Figure 1(a) | STAR | 0–60% | ||||||||||
Au-Au | 0–20% | |||||||||||
20–40% | ||||||||||||
40–60% | ||||||||||||
Figure 1(b) | STAR | 0–60% | ||||||||||
Au-Au | 0–20% | |||||||||||
20–40% | ||||||||||||
40–60% | ||||||||||||
Figure 1(c) | STAR | 0–60% | ||||||||||
Au-Au | 0–20% | |||||||||||
20–40% | ||||||||||||
40–60% | ||||||||||||
Figure 1(d) | PHENIX | 0–20% | ||||||||||
Au-Au | 20–40% | |||||||||||
40–60% | ||||||||||||
60–92% | ||||||||||||
Figure 1(e) | PHENIX | 0–20% | ||||||||||
Au-Au | 20–40% | |||||||||||
40–60% | ||||||||||||
60–92% |
![[Uncaptioned image]](https://cdn.awesomepapers.org/papers/3a222a20-6e66-4aa1-bfa8-abf5b6a1cb3e/x2.png)
Figure 2. Transverse momentum spectra, , of produced in -Au collisions at 200 GeV. Panels (a) and (b) show the spectra of in the backward and forward rapidity regions respectively, and panel (c) shows the spectra of at mid-rapidity , with different centrality classes. Panel (d) shows the spectra in minimum-bias collisions with different rapidity intervals. The symbols represent the spectra measured by the PHENIX Collaboration 21, the solid curves are our fitting results by Eq. (6), and the dot-dashed curves are our results refitted by Eq. (6) with .
![[Uncaptioned image]](https://cdn.awesomepapers.org/papers/3a222a20-6e66-4aa1-bfa8-abf5b6a1cb3e/x3.png)
Figure 3. Transverse momentum spectra, , of produced in Pb-Pb collisions at (a) 2.76 TeV and (b) 5.02 TeV, in the rapidity interval and with different centrality classes. The symbols represent the experimental data measured by the ALICE Collaboration 22; 23, the solid curves are our fitting results by Eq. (6), and the dot-dashed curves are our results refitted by Eq. (6) with .
Table 2. Left panel: Values of , , , , , and ndof corresponding to the solid curves in Figure 2 for -Au collisions. Right panel: Values of , , , , and ndof corresponding to the dot-dashed curves in Figure 2 for -Au collisions, in which .
Figure | Collab. | (GeV) | Selection | (GeV) | /ndof | (GeV) | /ndof | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Figure 2(a) | PHENIX | 0–20% | ||||||||||
-Au | 20–40% | |||||||||||
40–60% | ||||||||||||
60–88% | ||||||||||||
Figure 2(b) | PHENIX | 0–20% | ||||||||||
-Au | 20–40% | |||||||||||
40–60% | ||||||||||||
60–88% | ||||||||||||
Figure 2(c) | PHENIX | 0–20% | ||||||||||
-Au | 20–40% | |||||||||||
40–60% | ||||||||||||
60–88% | ||||||||||||
Figure 2(d) | PHENIX | |||||||||||
-Au | 0–100% | |||||||||||
Table 3. Left panel: Values of , , , , , and ndof corresponding to the solid curves in Figure 3 for Pb-Pb collisions. Right panel: Values of , , , , and ndof corresponding to the dot-dashed curves in Figure 3 for Pb-Pb collisions, in which .
Figure | Collab. | (TeV) | Selection | (GeV) | /ndof | (GeV) | /ndof | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Figure 3(a) | ALICE | 0–20% | ||||||||||
Pb-Pb | 20–40% | |||||||||||
40–90% | ||||||||||||
Figure 3(b) | ALICE | 0–10% | ||||||||||
Pb-Pb | 10–20% | |||||||||||
20–30% | ||||||||||||
30–40% | ||||||||||||
40–50% | ||||||||||||
50–60% | ||||||||||||
60–90% |
![[Uncaptioned image]](https://cdn.awesomepapers.org/papers/3a222a20-6e66-4aa1-bfa8-abf5b6a1cb3e/x4.png)
Figure 4. Transverse momentum spectra, (a, b, i, and j) or (c–h) , of (a, c, e, and g) prompt , (b) from , (d, f, and h) nonprompt , or (i and j) inclusive produced in -Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV. Panels (a–h) show the spectra for different rapidity intervals, while panels (i) and (j) show the spectra for given rapidity interval and different centrality classes. The symbols in panels (a and b), (c–f), (g and h), as well as (i and j) represent the experimental data measured by the LHCb 24, CMS 25, ATLAS 26, and ALICE 27 Collaborations, respectively. The solid curves are our fitting results by Eq. (6), and the dot-dashed curves are our results refitted by Eq. (6) with .
Table 4. Left panel: Values of , , , , , and ndof corresponding to the solid curves in Figure 4 for -Pb collisions. Right panel: Values of , , , , and ndof corresponding to the dot-dashed curves in Figure 4 for -Pb collisions, in which .
Figure | Collab. | (TeV) | Selection | (GeV) | (b) | /ndof | (GeV) | (b) | /ndof | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Figure 4(a) | LHCb | |||||||||||
-Pb | ||||||||||||
Figure 4(b) | LHCb | |||||||||||
-Pb | ||||||||||||
Figure 4(c) | CMS | |||||||||||
-Pb | ||||||||||||
Figure 4(d) | CMS | |||||||||||
-Pb | ||||||||||||
Figure 4(e) | CMS | |||||||||||
-Pb | ||||||||||||
Figure 4(f) | CMS | |||||||||||
-Pb | ||||||||||||
Figure 4(g) | ATLAS | |||||||||||
-Pb | ||||||||||||
Figure 4(h) | ATLAS | |||||||||||
-Pb | ||||||||||||
Figure 4(i) | ALICE | 2–10% | ||||||||||
-Pb | 10–20% | |||||||||||
20–40% | ||||||||||||
40–60% | ||||||||||||
60–80% | ||||||||||||
80–100% | ||||||||||||
Figure 4(j) | ALICE | 2–10% | ||||||||||
-Pb | 10–20% | |||||||||||
20–40% | ||||||||||||
40–60% | ||||||||||||
60–80% | ||||||||||||
80–100% |
![[Uncaptioned image]](https://cdn.awesomepapers.org/papers/3a222a20-6e66-4aa1-bfa8-abf5b6a1cb3e/x5.png)
Figure 5. Transverse momentum spectra, (a–c and g–j) , (d and e) , (f) , and (k–p) , of produced in - collisions at different energies. The data symbols in panels (a), (b and c), (d and e), (f), (g–j), and (k–p) are quoted from the PHENIX 28; 29; 30, STAR 31, CDF 32; 33, LHCb 34 and ALICE 35, CMS 25, and LHCb Collaborations 36; 37; 38, respectively. The solid curves are our fitting results by Eq. (6), and the dot-dashed curves are our results refitted by Eq. (6) with .
![[Uncaptioned image]](https://cdn.awesomepapers.org/papers/3a222a20-6e66-4aa1-bfa8-abf5b6a1cb3e/x6.png)
Figure 5. Continued. Panels (i–p) are presented.
Table 5. Left panel: Values of , , , , , and ndof corresponding to the solid curves in Figure 5 for - collisions. Right panel: Values of , , , , and ndof corresponding to the dot-dashed curves in Figure 5 for - collisions, in which .
Figure | Collab. | (TeV) | Selection | (GeV) | (b) | /ndof | (GeV) | (b) | /ndof | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Figure 5(a) | PHENIX | 0.2 | ||||||||||
- | ||||||||||||
Figure 5(b) | STAR | 0.5 | full cross section | |||||||||
- | fiducial cross section | |||||||||||
Figure 5(c) | STAR | 0.51 | full cross section | |||||||||
- | fiducial cross section | |||||||||||
Figure 5(d) | CDF | 1.8 | prompt | |||||||||
- | from | |||||||||||
Figure 5(e) | CDF | 1.96 | prompt | |||||||||
- | from | |||||||||||
Figure 5(f) | LHCb | 2.76 | ||||||||||
ALICE | ||||||||||||
Figure 5(g) | CMS | 5.02 | ||||||||||
- | ||||||||||||
Figure 5(h) | CMS | 5.02 | ||||||||||
- | ||||||||||||
Figure 5(i) | CMS | 5.02 | ||||||||||
- | ||||||||||||
Figure 5(j) | CMS | 5.02 | ||||||||||
- | ||||||||||||
Figure 5(k) | LHCb | 7 | ||||||||||
- | ||||||||||||
Figure 5(l) | LHCb | 7 | ||||||||||
- | ||||||||||||
Table 5. Continued. The parameters for the curves in Figures 5(m), 5(n), 5(o), and 5(p) are listed.
Figure | Collab. | (TeV) | Selection | (GeV) | (b) | /ndof | (GeV) | (b) | /ndof | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Figure 5(m) | LHCb | 8 | ||||||||||
- | ||||||||||||
Figure 5(n) | LHCb | 8 | ||||||||||
- | ||||||||||||
Figure 5(o) | LHCb | 13 | ||||||||||
- | ||||||||||||
Figure 5(p) | LHCb | 13 | ||||||||||
- | ||||||||||||
![[Uncaptioned image]](https://cdn.awesomepapers.org/papers/3a222a20-6e66-4aa1-bfa8-abf5b6a1cb3e/x7.png)
Figure 6. Dependences of power exponent (a), effective temperature (b), revised index (c) on centrality percentage in Au-Au, -Au, Pb-Pb, and -Pb collisions at the RHIC and LHC. The symbols represent the parameter values listed in Tables 1–4 and extracted from Figures 1–4.