HEPData Search

We present two-particle $p_{\rm t}$ correlations as a function of event centrality for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 7.7, 11.5, 14.5, 19.6, 27, 39, 62.4, and 200 GeV at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider using the STAR detector. These results are compared to previous measurements from CERES at the Super Proton Synchrotron and from ALICE at the Large Hadron Collider. The data are compared with UrQMD model calculations and with a model based on a Boltzmann-Langevin approach incorporating effects from thermalization. The relative dynamical correlations for Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV show a power law dependence on the number of participant nucleons and agree with the results for Pb+Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 2.76~ {\rm TeV}$ from ALICE. As the collision energy is lowered from $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV to 7.7 GeV, the centrality dependence of the relative dynamical correlations departs from the power law behavior observed at the higher collision energies. In central collisions, the relative dynamical correlations increase with collision energy up to $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 200 GeV in contrast to previous measurements that showed little dependence on the collision energy.

57 data tables match query

Table 1 from Fig 1

'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 2 from Fig 1

'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 3 from Fig 1

'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 4 from Fig 1

'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 5 from Fig 1

'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 6 from Fig 1

'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 7 from Fig 1

'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 8 from Fig 1

'The relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 9 from Fig 1

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 10 from Fig 1

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 11 from Fig 1

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 12 from Fig 1

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 13 from Fig 1

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 14 from Fig 1

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 15 from Fig 1

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 16 from Fig 1

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 17 from Fig 1

'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 18 from Fig 1

'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 19 from Fig 1

'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 20 from Fig 1

'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 21 from Fig 1

'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 22 from Fig 1

'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 23 from Fig 1

'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 24 from Fig 1

'ratios of the measured data to the power law as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 25 from Fig 1

'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 26 from Fig 1

'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 27 from Fig 1

'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 28 from Fig 1

'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 29 from Fig 1

'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 30 from Fig 1

'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 31 from Fig 1

'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 32 from Fig 1

'The ratios of the measured data to UrQMD calculations as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 33 from Fig 2

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 34 from Fig 2

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 35 from Fig 2

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 36 from Fig 2

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 37 from Fig 2

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 38 from Fig 2

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 39 from Fig 2

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 40 from Fig 2

'The UrQMD calculations of relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 41 from Fig 3

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 42 from Fig 3

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 43 from Fig 3

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 44 from Fig 3

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 45 from Fig 3

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 46 from Fig 3

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 47 from Fig 3

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 48 from Fig 3

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 49 from Fig 3

'Comparison of a model incorporating a Boltzmann-Langevin approach to the calculation of thermalization effects for the relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 50 from Fig 4

'relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 51 from Fig 4

'relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 52 from Fig 4

'relative dynamical correlation as a function of $N_{part}$'

Table 53 from Fig 5

'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'

Table 54 from Fig 5

'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'

Table 55 from Fig 5

'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'

Table 56 from Fig 5

'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'

Table 57 from Fig 5

'relative dynamical correlation as a function of collision energy for the 0-5\% centrality bin'

More…