Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byDiane Carter Modified over 9 years ago
1
Xi’an 2006 STAR 1 STAR Particle Ratios and Spectra: Energy and B dependence International Workshop On Hadron Physics and Property of High Baryon Density Matter Olga Barannikova, UIC
2
Xi’an 2006 STAR 2 Outline: Identified measurements in STAR QCD Phase Diagram Theoretical view Experimental probes: AGS, SPS, RHIC Excitation functions for yields and ratios Freeze-out properties in AA collisions Exploring the QCD phases Search for (tri)critical point Probing Medium Hadronization mechanisms Energy Loss Summary Soft Hard
3
Xi’an 2006 STAR 3 Particle Identification Topological method dE/dx method K(892) + K (1020) K + K (1520) p + K... K 0 s + + p + TPC NIM A 499, 659 (2003)NIM A 508, 181 (2003) K p e d He3 TOF
4
Xi’an 2006 STAR 4 Transverse mass spectra Variety of hadron species: , p, Au+Au, Cu+Cu, d+Au, pp Same experimental setup! Spectral shapes: kinetic FO properties transverse radial flow Flavor composition: Hadro -chemistry chemical FO properties T ch @ chemical FO strangeness production PRL 97, 152301 (2006) nucl-ex/0601042 nucl-ex/0606014
5
Xi’an 2006 STAR 5 QCD Phase Diagram Lattice QCD prediction F. Karsch, hep-lat/0401031 (2004) T C ~170 8 MeV C ~0.5 GeV/fm 3 E SC u = d = 0, s = The chiral phase transition changes from second to first order at a tricritical point; SC s >> u = d 0 Presence of the strange quark shifts E to the left; CFL E u = d 0, s = 2 nd order phase transition changes into smooth cross-over
6
Xi’an 2006 STAR 6 Theory: NJL/I Asakawa,Yazaki ’89 NJL/II ibidem COBarducci, et al. ’89-94 NJL/instBerges, Rajagopal ’98 RMHalasz, et al. ’98 LSM Scavenius, et al. ’01 NJL ibidem LR-1 Fodor, Katz ’01 CJT Hatta, Ikeda, ’02 HB Antoniou, Kapoyannis ’02 LTE Ejiri, et al. ’03 LR-2 Fodor, Katz ’04 — MIT Bag/QGP (only 1st order) Theoretical (models and lattice) predictions for the location of the critical point. M. Stephanov Acta Phys.Polon.B35:2939-2962,2004 Where is the Critical Point?
7
Xi’an 2006 STAR 7 Particle Yields and Statistical Models Thermalized system of hadrons can be described by statistical model: Hadron species are populated according to phase space probabilities (maximum entropy) (Fermi, Hagedorn) Very successful in describing experimental data T, μ q, μ s,V, γ s,… Mapping the Phase Diagram T chem Schematic space–time view of a heavy ion collision Experiment:
8
Xi’an 2006 STAR 8 Model Description of Yields STAR white paper NuclPhysA757(05)102 T=160 5 MeV B =24 4MeV s =0.99 0.07 2 =9.6/8 dof
9
Xi’an 2006 STAR 9 B drops with collision energy G. Roland From calculations by Redlich et al, Becattini et al, Braun- Munzinger et al, Rafelski et al. Baryon transport at mid-rapidity: Smooth excitation function AGS RHIC Similar trend for between AA and pp Systematics of Thermal Freeze-out Satz: Nucl.Phys. A715 (2003) 3c filled: AA open: elementary T ch approaches limiting value Can saturation trend be explained by Hagedorn hypotheses?
10
Xi’an 2006 STAR 10 Chemical Equilibrium: s 1 s ~ u, d T, µ B,V - vary with energy, but Λ, Ξ - yields stays constant Change in baryon transport reflected in anti-baryons (and K) Strangeness Production PRL 89 (2002), 092301 nucl-ex/0206008 nucl-ex/0307024 H.Caines 100 200 300 400 Npart 1 0.8 0.6 0.4 0.2 0 ss P. Steinberg et al.. 0
11
Xi’an 2006 STAR 11 Phase Diagram 1st order QGP Hadronic phase Cleymans and Redlich, PRL 81(1998) 5284 Fodor, Katz JHEP04(2004)050 Freeze-out parameters approach Lattice-QCD phase boundary ~at SPS energies FO at E 1GeV per particle Success of Statistical Models describing particle yields Chemical freeze-out: T ch , μ B SIS RHIC At RHIC (and may be SPS) chemical freeze-out may probe the phase boundary: Insensitive to centrality
12
Xi’an 2006 STAR 12 Transverse mass spectra at mid-rapidity: Evidence for Thermalization? , K, p T= 90MeV, T=160MeV, 1/p T dN/dp T and E.Schnedermann, J. Sollfrank, U. Heinz PRC48 (1993) 2462. Blast-wave model , K, p T = 90MeV, = 0.6 c , T = 160MeV, = 0.45 c
13
Xi’an 2006 STAR 13 Blast-Wave vs. Hydro Large flow, lots of re-interactions, thermalization likely T dec = 100 MeV Kolb and Rapp, PRC 67 (2003) 044903. Multi-strange spectra: Hydro: single T f.o What about fit quality? BW: lower T kin, higher for ,K,p compared to T kin ~ 90 MeV, ~ 0.6 T kin ~ T ch ~ 160 MeV ~ 0.45 rescattering at hadronization Is Blast-Wave realistic?
14
Xi’an 2006 STAR 14 Freeze-out Systematics T th [GeV] [c] T. Nayak SPS RHIC: smooth systematic behavior of all global variables Strong increase in radial flow ( ) from SIS to SPS Changing trends of freeze-out parameters between AGS and SPS energies? Back to the Future Low energy scan to find the “Landmark”
15
Xi’an 2006 STAR 15 What Points to Critical Point? ~ 1, ~2, 3 Gavai, Fodor, Ejiri, Gupta Katzet al Large fluctuations are expected when hadronization is close to Critical Point Theory: “Horn” structure in K + / (smooth rise in K - / ) Hadronic models do not reproduce the “horn” Strong increase in K/ fluctuations towards lower energies Experiment:
16
Xi’an 2006 STAR 16 Particle Spectra and Yields – major tools to study soft sector Success of Hydro and Statistical Models At RHIC the final system appears to be in local equilibrium Chemical FO at RHIC (SPS?) coincides with hadronization Energy scan at RHIC could locate Landmark of Phase Diagram yields and ratios yields and ratios T and B High B – Summary and Future Soft Hydro, Statistical Model
17
Xi’an 2006 STAR 17 High T – Probing Early Stage High-p T particle spectra to address properties of the created medium and hadronization mechanisms in sQGP Hard pQCD, Fragmentation Jet quenching Energy loss mechanisms Energy Density Thermalization
18
Xi’an 2006 STAR 18 High-p T Hadron Suppression pQCD calculations of partonic energy loss Central Au+Au: x30 gluon density, x100 energy density = 10-20 GeV/fm 3 >> C. Hadronic models: hadronic energy loss can explain at most 20% of the effect. ~p T -independence of measured R CP unlikely that hadron absorption dominates jet quenching Look at the ratio of the hadron spectra: Large p T particles are suppressed in central Au+Au, but not in d+Au.
19
Xi’an 2006 STAR 19 nucl-ex/0510052 Identified R AA /R CP Particle-type dependence of R cp at the intermediate p T Baryons exhibit less suppression Or more enhancement?? hydro-like flow? gluon junction? coalescence/recombination? STAR: Nucl. Phys. A 757 (2005) 102 Two groups (2<pT<6GeV/c): , Ks, K , K*, φ mesons p, Λ, Ξ, Ω baryons
20
Xi’an 2006 STAR 20 Baryon Enhancement Intermediate p T : Significant baryon/meson enhancement Strong centrality dependence Baryon/meson ratios become similar in AA and pp at p T ~ 6 GeV/c Fragmentation is not dominant at p T < 6 GeV/c p+p /K 0 s Au+Au 0-5%
21
Xi’an 2006 STAR 21 Color-charge effects on E-Loss Data: –No strong centrality dependence in ratios – Same suppression in R cp above 7 GeV/c not consistent with the jet quenching prediction ( X.N. Wang, PRC 58 (2321) 19) points to similar energy loss for partonic sources of p, pbar, and STAR Preliminary Energy loss in QCD matter: –Possible to test expectations of higher energy loss for gluons vs. quarks X 2 or X 3 (S. Wicks et al., nucl-ex/0512076)
22
Xi’an 2006 STAR 22 Flavor-dependence of E-Loss Light vs. Heavy Flavor : u,d c,b Similar energy loss for partonic sources of , p and non-photonic electrons
23
Xi’an 2006 STAR 23 Particle Yields and Spectra – major tools for experimental study of QCD matter: Mapping the Phase Diagram Observing Jet Quenching Studying Thermalization Energy Loss vs. Color-charge/Flavor Summary and Outlook Open Questions: Establish that jet quenching is an indicator of parton E loss (Energy Scan would help to determine suppression turn-on, and study systematically quark vs. gluon jets) Does the high initial gluon density inferred from parton E loss fits demand a deconfined initial state? Location of the Critical Point (needs Energy Scan to higher B )
Similar presentations
© 2025 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.