Download presentation
Presentation is loading. Please wait.
Published byMabel Andrews Modified over 8 years ago
1
Charged Hadron Nuclear Modification Factors in the Beam Energy Scan data from STAR Stephen Horvat for the STAR collaboration Yale University Stephen HorvatCPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 20131
2
Contents Stephen HorvatCPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 20132 STAR Detector Beam Energy Scan Nuclear Modification Factors (R CP ) Physics –jets as probes –Cronin enhancement R CP Results –charged hadrons –identified hadrons x T scaling Conclusions
3
upVPD Magnet TOF BEMC BBC EEMC TPC © Maria & Alex Schmah The Solenoid Tracker At RHIC (STAR) TPC: |η| < 1 & 2π in azimuth TOF: |η| <0.9 & 2π in azimuth
4
Is there a critical point and if so where? Is there evidence for a first order phase transition? At what energy do key QGP signatures turn off? nuclear modification factor dihadron correlations ncq scaling Beam Energy Scan 4CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat
5
Data YearN event MB 7.720104M 11.5201012M 19.6201136M 27201170M 392010130M 62.4201067M 20020014M 5Stephen HorvatCPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013
6
Nuclear Modification Factor p + p Au + Au Peripheral 6 Au + Au Central N bin ≡ number of binary collisions (from Glauber) hard scatterings produce early high p T probes CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat
7
Suppression of high p T Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 172302 (2003) 7 ‘Suppression’ ≡ R CP < 1 ‘Quenching’ ≡ loss of energy for high momentum particles CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat STAR AuAu200
8
The ‘Cronin Effect’ is the experimentally observed enhancement of spectra in asymmetric collisions relative to a p+p reference d+Au for Cold Nuclear Matter (CNM) Physics Letters B 637 (2006) 161–169 The suppression observed at 200GeV is not a CNM effect Protons are more enhanced than pions maybe pions are better probes? 8CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat Protons Pions dAu200
9
Expectations for the BES 9CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat
10
Results - Spectra STAR Preliminary Peripheral spectra shows stronger dependence on beam energy 10 0-5% 60-80% CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat CentralPeripheral Statistical errors only slopes ~ equalslopes different
11
Results - R CP 11CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat h + + h -
12
To Measure Quenching This motivates alternative methods to investigate quenching 1.species dependence through identified-particle R CP 2.comparison to models 3.variations from scaling patterns 12CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat
13
PID Spectra STAR Preliminary Statistical errors only 13CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat 0-5% 60-80% π+π+ p K+K+ π+π+ K+K+ p p T (GeV/c)
14
PID R CP Positive particles QM2012 14CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat STAR Preliminary
15
PID R CP Negative particles QM2012 15CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat STAR Preliminary
16
PID R CP Pions are less enhanced than protons A higher p T reach may reveal suppression for additional beam energies Anti-proton R CP is lower than protons at low momentum –annihilation? Kaon behavior is complex (or strange☺) –no obvious mass ordering for all energies Stephen HorvatCPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 201316
17
Models HIJING 1.383 –jet quenching on or off –modeled as -dE/dx within the medium –default Lund splitting parameters a=0.5,b=0.9 AMPT v1.21/v2.21(uses HIJING 1.383) –string melting (SM) off uses Lund string fragmentation for hadronization (v1.21) –SM on uses quark coalescence for hadronization (v2.21) –default Lund splitting parameters a=2.2, b=0.5 Stephen HorvatCPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 201317 Lund fragmentation formula:
18
HIJING quenching on Similar behavior to data 200GeV has odd low p T behavior Generally overestimates R CP 18CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat DATAHIJING N bin
19
HIJING quenching off 200GeV better behaved at low p T 7.7GeV barely changed from quenching on 19CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat DATAHIJING N bin
20
AMPT SM off Minimal beam energy dependence Sharp turn over near 2.5GeV/c 20CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat DATAAMPT N bin
21
AMPT SM on Recovers beam energy dependence Limited p T reach (same number of simulated events for SM on/off) 21CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat DATAAMPT N bin
22
HIJING quenching on, alt HIJING with AMPT’s Lund splitting parameters Small effect to R CP from different parameters 22CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat HIJING N bin N coll
23
HIJING quenching on, alt 23CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat central spectra ratio peripheral spectra ratio R CP HIJING Lund values ____________________________________________ R CP AMPT Lund values Spectra for central and peripheral are altered by similar amounts when fragmentation parameters are changed
24
Model summary HIJING captures beam energy dependence of spectra Jet quenching as modeled in HIJING has a greater effect on higher beam energies For AMPT, lower beam energies are better matched by SM off, while SM on better captures the beam energy dependence –physics of hadronization shifts from coalescence to fragmentation? Stephen HorvatCPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 201324
25
Alternative Scaling 25 Physics Letters B 637 (2006) 161–169 CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat
26
x T scaling STAR Preliminary Stat. errors only 26CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat There may be centrality dependence to the exponent (6.5±0.8)
27
Scaling the y-axis STAR Preliminary Stat. errors only 27CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat
28
Outlook Triggered dihadron correlations provide another method to detect jet-quenching and give another signature for the formation of a QGP p+p data from several BES energies would provide a cleaner reference. Combined with d+Au data, the relative contributions from CNM effects and quenching may be disentangled Additional models and tunes may improve our understanding of the data by quantifying the relative contributions of quenching and enhancement 28CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat
29
Conclusions 29CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat
30
CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 201330 Thank you!
31
Model statistics YearN event MBAMPTAMPT SMHIJINGHIJING QoffHIJING alternate Lund 7.720104M1.2M 5.2M2.2M4.3M 11.5201012M1.2M 2.5M500k9.3M 19.6201136M1.2M 970k1.7M1M 27201170M1.2M 1M1.4M950k 392010130M1.2M1.0M1M 800k 62.4201067M1.2M1.0M1M 20020014M1.3M1.0M1M 31Stephen HorvatCPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013
32
PHENIX QM2012 PHENIX and STAR results are not completely consistent STAR sees greater enhancement of central pion spectra for p T <5GeV/c 2012-08-1332T. Sakaguchi, QM2012@Washington D.C. STAR PHENIX
33
Cronin’s result Some beam energy dependence for the Cronin Effect was previously observed PRL 68, 452 (1992) Straub et al. 33 R(p+W)/(p+Be) p T (GeV/c) CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat
34
Effect of quenching in HIJING Stephen HorvatCPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 201334
35
HIJING quenching on/off Central 0-5% ratioPeripheral 60-80% ratio Spectra Ratios As might be expected, quenching mostly effects central spectra Stephen HorvatCPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 201335
36
HIJING quenching on/data 36CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat central spectra ratio peripheral spectra ratio R CP HIJING Quenching on _______________________________________________ R CP Data Spectra for central and peripheral from data disagree with model
37
HIJING quenching off/data 37CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat central spectra ratio peripheral spectra ratio R CP HIJING Quenching off _______________________________________________ R CP Data Spectra for central and peripheral from data disagree with model
38
HIJING quenching Lund/data 38CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat central spectra ratio peripheral spectra ratio R CP HIJING w/ AMPT Lund par. _______________________________________________ R CP Data Spectra for central and peripheral from data disagree with model
39
AMPT SM off/data 39CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat central spectra ratio peripheral spectra ratio R CP SM off _________________________________ R CP Data Spectra for central and peripheral from data disagree with model
40
AMPT SM on/data 40CPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 2013Stephen Horvat central spectra ratio peripheral spectra ratio R CP SM on ____________________________ R CP Data Spectra for central and peripheral from data disagree with model
41
Stephen HorvatCPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 201341
42
Stephen HorvatCPOD 2013, Napa, California, 11-15 March 201342
Similar presentations
© 2024 SlidePlayer.com. Inc.
All rights reserved.