$R_{AA}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ from $0-5\%$ and $60-80\%$ central Au+Au events for $\Lambda$. Stat. and syst. errors added in quadrature.The band at unity shows the systematic uncertainty on $⟨N_{bin}⟩$. The dashed line below unity shows the expected value of RAA should the yields scale with $⟨N_{part}⟩$, and the band around it shows the systematic uncertainty on ⟨Npart ⟩. $N_{bin}$ Scaling 1 $\pm$ 0.16 and $N_{part}$ Scaling 0.168 $\pm$ 0.02 .

$R_{AA}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ from $0-5\%$ and $60-80\%$ central Au+Au events for $\Xi^{-} + \bar{\Xi}^{+}$. Stat. and syst. errors added in quadrature. The band at unity shows the systematic uncertainty on $⟨N_{bin}⟩$. The dashed line below unity shows the expected value of RAA should the yields scale with $⟨N_{part}⟩$, and the band around it shows the systematic uncertainty on ⟨Npart ⟩. $N_{bin}$ Scaling 1 $\pm$ 0.16 and $N_{part}$ Scaling 0.168 $\pm$ 0.02 .

$R_{AA}$ as a function of $p_{T}$ from $0-5\%$ and $60-80\%$ central Au+Au events for inclusive $p+\bar{p}$. Stat. and syst. errors added in quadrature. The band at unity shows the systematic uncertainty on $⟨N_{bin}⟩$. The dashed line below unity shows the expected value of RAA should the yields scale with $⟨N_{part}⟩$, and the band around it shows the systematic uncertainty on ⟨Npart ⟩. $N_{bin}$ Scaling 1 $\pm$ 0.16 and $N_{part}$ Scaling 0.168 $\pm$ 0.02 .

$R_{AA}$ from HIJING as a function of $p_{T}$ from $0-5\%$ central Au+Au events for inclusive $p+\bar{p}$.

$R_{AA}$ from HIJING as a function of $p_{T}$ from $0-5\%$ central Au+Au events for $\Lambda$.

$R_{AA}$ from HIJING as a function of $p_{T}$ from $0-5\%$ central Au+Au events for $\Xi^{-}+\bar{\Xi}^{+}$.

$R_{AA}$ from EPOS as a function of $p_{T}$ from $0-5\%$ central Au+Au events for inclusive $p+\bar{p}$.

$R_{AA}$ from EPOS as a function of $p_{T}$ from $0-5\%$ central Au+Au events for $\Lambda$.

$R_{AA}$ from EPOS as a function of $p_{T}$ from $0-5\%$ central Au+Au events for $\Xi^{-}+\bar{\Xi}^{+}$.

$R_{AA}$ from HIJING as a function of $p_{T}$ from $60-80\%$ central Au+Au events for inclusive $p+\bar{p}$.

$R_{AA}$ from HIJING as a function of $p_{T}$ from $60-80\%$ central Au+Au events for $\Lambda$.

$R_{AA}$ from HIJING as a function of $p_{T}$ from $60-80\%$ central Au+Au events for $\Xi^{-}+\bar{\Xi}^{+}$.

$R_{AA}$ from EPOS as a function of $p_{T}$ from $60-80\%$ central Au+Au events for inclusive $p+\bar{p}$.

$R_{AA}$ from EPOS as a function of $p_{T}$ from $60-80\%$ central Au+Au events for $\Lambda$.

$R_{AA}$ from EPOS as a function of $p_{T}$ from $60-80\%$ central Au+Au events for $\Xi^{-}+\bar{\Xi}^{+}$.

FIG. 4. Ridge yield Eq. (9) in $|\Delta \eta|<1.7$ and $2 \mathrm{GeV/c}<p^{assoc}_{t}$ < $p^{trig}_{t}$ as a function of $p_{t}^{t r i g}$. Solid lines are the systematic uncertainty due to $v_{2}$.

FIG. 5. Projection of $d N /\left.d \Delta \phi\right|_{a, b}$ for $0.7<|\Delta \eta|<1.4$ [Eq. (3)] in two trigger $p_{t}$ windows for $2<p_{t}^{\text {assoc }}<4 \mathrm{GeV} / \mathrm{c} .$ No background subtraction has been applied; note the suppressed zero on the vertical scale. The shaded band shows the fit of the function $k_{1}+k_{2}$. $\cos (2 \Delta \phi)$ to the recoil region $2<|\Delta \phi|<\pi$ for $4<p_{t}^{\text {trig }}<6 \mathrm{GeV} / c$. The width of the band indicates the fitting error. The solid curve represents the background estimate using the ZYAM normalization for $4<p_{t}^{\text {trig }}<6 \mathrm{GeV} / c .$ Systematic uncertainties are indicated by the light shaded band.

FIG. 6. (Color online) Differential $p_{t}$ spectrum for associated particles in central $\mathrm{Au}+$ Au collisions, with $4<p_{t}^{\text {trig }}<6$ and $6<p_{t}^{\text {trig }}<10 \mathrm{GeV} / c$ . The dash-dotted line is the inclusive hadron spectrum from central $\mathrm{Au}+$ Au collisions $[1] .$ Left panel: ridge spectrum; shaded bands show systematic uncertainty. Right panel: jet-like spectrum, also compared to $d+$ Au reference measurements. The lines in both panels show exponential fits to the data (see Table III). Data are offset horizontally for clarity.

FIG. 6. (Color online) Differential $p_{t}$ spectrum for associated particles in central $\mathrm{Au}+$ Au collisions, with $4<p_{t}^{\text {trig }}<6$ and $6<p_{t}^{\text {trig }}<10 \mathrm{GeV} / c$ . The dash-dotted line is the inclusive hadron spectrum from central $\mathrm{Au}+$ Au collisions $[1] .$ Left panel: ridge spectrum; shaded bands show systematic uncertainty. Right panel: jet-like spectrum, also compared to $d+$ Au reference measurements. The lines in both panels show exponential fits to the data (see Table III). Data are offset horizontally for clarity.

Non photonic electron yield in minimum bias D+AU collisions versus $p_{T}$.

Non photonic electron yield in AU+AU collisions versus PT, for a centrality range of 40-80% To obtain a differential cross-section in mb/(GeV2), multiply listed data by 30 Note that, in addition to the statistical and systematical errors, there is a normalization error on the value, given in the second column.

Non photonic electron yield in Au+Au collisions versus $p_{T}$, for a centrality range of 40-80%.

Non photonic electron yield in AU+AU collisions versus PT, for a centrality range of 10-40% To obtain a differential cross-section in mb/(GeV2), multiply listed data by 30 Note that, in addition to the statistical and systematical errors, there is a normalization error on the value, given in the second column.

Non photonic electron yield in Au+Au collisions versus $p_{T}$, for a centrality range of 10-40%.

Non photonic electron yield in AU+AU collisions versus PT, for a centrality range of 0-5% To obtain a differential cross-section in mb/(GeV2), multiply listed data by 30 Note that, in addition to the statistical and systematical errors, there is a normalization error on the value, given in the second column.

Non photonic electron yield in Au+Au collisions versus $p_{T}$, for a centrality range of 0-5%.

Nuclear modification factor for non-photonic electrons in minimum bias D+AU reactions Note that, in addition to the statistical and systematical errors, there is a normalization error on the value, given in the second column.

Nuclear modification factor for non-photonic electrons in minimum bias d+Au reactions.

Nuclear modification factor for non-photonic electrons in AU+AU reactions in the centrality range of 0-5% Note that, in addition to the statistical and systematical errors, there is a normalization error on the value, given in the second column.

Nuclear modification factor for non-photonic electrons in Au+Au reactions in the centrality range of 0-5%.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the near-side associated-particle yield.

$\Delta\phi$ distribution used to extract the away-side yield. The triangular pair acceptance correction in $\Delta\eta$ is not applied.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the away-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the away-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the away-side associated-particle yield.

$N_{part}$ dependence of the away-side associated-particle yield.

Away-side associated particle distribution.

$I_{AA}$.

$I_{AA}$.

$I_{AA}$.

$I_{AA}$.

Background-subtracted charge-independent (AAT ) correlated hadron pair density in 40-80% Au+Au collisions for 3<p(t)⊥<10 GeV/cand 1<p(a)⊥<3 GeV/c. The results are for near-side correlated hadrons within |∆φ1,2|<0.7, and corrected for the 3-particle ∆η-∆η acceptance. Statistical errors at (∆η1,∆η2)∼(0,0)are approximately 0.058 for Au+Au respectively..

Background-subtracted charge-independent (AAT ) correlated hadron pair density in 0-12% Au+Au collisions for 3<p(t)⊥<10 GeV/cand 1<p(a)⊥<3 GeV/c. The results are for near-side correlated hadrons within |∆φ1,2|<0.7, and corrected for the 3-particle ∆η-∆η acceptance. Statistical errors at (∆η1,∆η2)∼(0,0)are approximately 0.084 for Au+Au respectively..

The average correlated hadron pair density per trigger particle as a function of R for all charges in minimum 0-12% Au+Au collision. The average〈ˆP〉for AAT as a function of R = $\sqrt{∆η21+ ∆η22}$. The average density is peaked at R∼0 and decreases with R for all systems. In 0-12% Au+Au collisions, the average denstiy drops more slowly andbecomes approximately constant aboveR>1, indicatingthe presence of the ridge.

The average correlated hadron pair density per trigger particle as a function of R for all charges in minimum 40-80% Au+Au collision. The average〈ˆP〉for AAT as a function of R = $\sqrt{∆η21+ ∆η22}$. The average density is peaked at R∼0 and decreases with R for all systems. For 40-80% Au+Au collisions the average density at R>1 is consistent with zero, indicating no ridge contribution

The average correlated hadron pair density per trigger particle as a function of R for all charges in minimum d+Au collision. The average〈ˆP〉for AAT as a function of R = $\sqrt{∆η21+ ∆η22}$. The average density is peaked at R∼0 and decreases with R for all systems. For d+Au collisions the average density at R>1 is consistent with zero, indicating no ridge contribution

Radial dependence of average 3-particle correlation pair density for 0-12% Au+Au (like-sign triplets) data. The results are shown in Fig. 3(b) Indeed, no jet-like component is apparent in A^±A^±T^±.The A^±A^±T^∓ result contains both jet-like and ridge components.

Radial dependence of average 3-particle correlation pair density for 40-80% Au+Au (like-sign triplets) data. The contribution from other charge combinations, namely A^±A^∓ T^±, are simply the difference between AAT in Fig.3(a) and (A^±A^±T^± + A^±A^± T^∓) in Fig. 3(b). We found this to be equal to twice the A^±A^± T^∓contribution within errors.

Radial dependence of average 3-particle correlation pair density for d+Au (AAT) data. We expect the ridge contributions in the correlated pair density to be the same in all charge combinations. We verified this for large ∆η correlatedpair densities within our current statistics, as can be seen from Fig. 3(b). Therefore the total ridge particle pair density (ˆPrr) can be obtained as four times A^±A^±T^±. The remaining jet-like signal, the sum of jet-like correlated particle pairs (ˆPjj) and cross pairs of a jet-like and a ridge particle (ˆPjr), can then be obtained by subtracting the total ridge from AAT.

for same-sign associated particles (A^\pm A^\pm T^\pm and A^\pm A^\pm T^\mp) in 0-12% Au+Au collisions Systematic uncertainties are shown in the shaded boxes due to background normalization and in the solid curves due to flow.

The R dependence of the average〈ˆPrr〉and〈ˆPjj〉+〈ˆPjr〉in 0-12% Au+Au collisions.The ridge pair density is consistent with a constant 60.14±0.02 (χ2/ndf=5.8/7). Gaussian fits indicate a best fit value σ = 2.1 (χ2/ndf=4.8/6, solid curve) and σ >1.4 (dashed curve) with 84% confidence level. On the otherhand, the jet-like component is narrow with a Gaussianσ=0.34+0.13−0.09(χ2/ndf=0.8/6, dominated by statistical errors), comparing well to those from the correlated single hadron density.

The average correlated hadron pair density per trigger particle in 0-12% Au+Au collisions for the jet-like andridge components as a function of R. The solid curves are Gaussian fits. The dashed curve is a Gaussian fit with a fixed σ=1.4 to the ridge data. The systematic uncertainities on the ridge data are shown in shaded boxes due to background normalization and in open boxes due to flow.

The R dependence of the average in 0-12% Au+Au collisions.for the ridge as a function of ξ within R<1.4. The solid curves are Gaussian fits. To investigate possible structures in the ridge, we show in Fig. 4(b) the average ridge particle pair density as a function of ξ = arctan(∆η2/∆η1) within R<1.4. The data are consistent with a uniform distribution in ξ(χ2/ndf=1.7/7). This suggests that the ridge particles are uncorrelated in ∆η not only with the trigger particle but also between themselves. In other words,the ridge appears to be uniform in ∆η event-by-event.

FIG. 2: a) left side: The correlation data for the ratio of the histograms of same-event-pairs to mixed-event-pairs for unlike-sign charged pairs, shown in a two-dimensional (2-D) perspective plot $\Delta\phi$ - $\Delta\eta$. The plot was normalized to a mean of 1. b) right side: The similar correlation data for like-sign charge pairs.

FIG. 3: a) left side: Folded correlation data for unlike-sign charge pairs on $\Delta\phi$ and $\Delta\eta$ based on demonstrated symmetries in the data. This increases the statistics in a typical bin by a factor of four. Henceforth we will be dealing with folded data only. b) right side: Similar folded data for like-sign charge pairs.

FIG. 3: a) left side: Folded correlation data for unlike-sign charge pairs on $\Delta\phi$ and $\Delta\eta$ based on demonstrated symmetries in the data. This increases the statistics in a typical bin by a factor of four. Henceforth we will be dealing with folded data only. b) right side: Similar folded data for like-sign charge pairs.

FIG. 4: “(Color online)”a) left side: The 2 dimensional (2-D) approximately gaussian signal shape equation (4) from the fit to the normalized and folded unlike-sign charge pairs signal data. b) right side: The unlike-sign charge pairs signal data corresponding to the adjoining signal function on the left side.

FIG. 4: “(Color online)”a) left side: The 2 dimensional (2-D) approximately gaussian signal shape equation (4) from the fit to the normalized and folded unlike-sign charge pairs signal data. b) right side: The unlike-sign charge pairs signal data corresponding to the adjoining signal function on the left side.

FIG. 5 :“(Color online)”a) left side: A perspective plot of the fit to the 2-D like-sign charge pairs signal shape of equation (5). b) right side: Like-sign charge pairs signal data corresponding to the adjacent signal fit on the left side.

FIG. 5: “(Color online)”a) left side: A perspective plot of the fit to the 2-D like-sign charge pairs signal shape of equation (5). b) right side: Like-sign charge pairs signal data corresponding to the adjacent signal fit on the left side.

FIG. 6: “(Color online)”a) left side: The charge dependent (CD) signal shape is a 2 dimensional (2-D) approximate gaussian which is symmetrical. The average gaussian width is 27.5$^{\circ}$ $\pm$ 3.2$^{\circ}$ (0.48 $\pm$ 0.056 rad) both in $\Delta\phi$ and $\Delta\eta$. Thus we are observing a greater probability for unlike-sign charge pairs of particles than for like-sign charge pairs emitted randomly on 2-D $\eta\phi$ directions. b) right side: The CD signal data corresponding to the adjacent signal fit on the left.

FIG. 6: “(Color online)”a) left side: The charge dependent (CD) signal shape is a 2 dimensional (2-D) approximate gaussian which is symmetrical. The average gaussian width is 27.5$^{\circ}$ $\pm$ 3.2$^{\circ}$ (0.48 $\pm$ 0.056 rad) both in $\Delta\phi$ and $\Delta\eta$. Thus we are observing a greater probability for unlike-sign charge pairs of particles than for like-sign charge pairs emitted randomly on 2-D $\eta\phi$ directions. b) right side: The CD signal data corresponding to the adjacent signal fit on the left.

FIG. 7: “(Color online)”a) left side: The fit to the charge independent (CI) signal shape which is the sum of the fits of like-sign plus unlike-sign charge pairs signals. The 2-D gaussian equivalent RMS signal has a $\Delta\phi$ width of about 32$^{\circ}$ (0.52 rad), and $\Delta\eta$ width of about 66$^{\circ}$ (1.15 rad) which is about double the $\Delta\phi$ width. b) right side: The CI signal data corresponding to the adjacent fit on the left.

FIG. 7: “(Color online)”a) left side: The fit to the charge independent (CI) signal shape which is the sum of the fits of like-sign plus unlike-sign charge pairs signals. The 2-D gaussian equivalent RMS signal has a $\Delta\phi$ width of about 32$^{\circ}$ (0.52 rad), and $\Delta\eta$ width of about 66$^{\circ}$ (1.15 rad) which is about double the $\Delta\phi$ width. b) right side: The CI signal data corresponding to the adjacent fit on the left.

FIG. 8: a) left side: The charge independent (CI) signal data with the lower range of elliptic flow amplitude and the best $\chi^2$ (the same as Figure 7b) plotted as a 2-D perspective plot on $\Delta\phi$ vs. $\Delta\eta$. b) right side: The charge independent (CI) signal data with our maximum elliptic flow amplitude used in our analysis ($\chi^2$ was worse by 1$\sigma$).

FIG. 8: a) left side: The charge independent (CI) signal data with the lower range of elliptic flow amplitude and the best $\chi^2$ (the same as Figure 7b) plotted as a 2-D perspective plot on $\Delta\phi$ vs. $\Delta\eta$. b) right side: The charge independent (CI) signal data with our maximum elliptic flow amplitude used in our analysis ($\chi^2$ was worse by 1$\sigma$).

Minimum-bias (0–80% of the collision cross section) v2(pT ) for identified hadrons at |η| < 1 from Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. To facilitate comparisons between panels, v2 values for inclusive charged hadrons are displayed in each panel. The error bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. Systematic uncertainties for the identified particles are shown as shaded bands around v2 = 0.

Minimum-bias (0–80% of the collision cross section) v2(pT ) for identified hadrons at |η| < 1 from Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. To facilitate comparisons between panels, v2 values for inclusive charged hadrons are displayed in each panel. The error bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. Systematic uncertainties for the identified particles are shown as shaded bands around v2 = 0.

Minimum-bias (0–80% of the collision cross section) v2(pT ) for identified hadrons at |η| < 1 from Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. To facilitate comparisons between panels, v2 values for inclusive charged hadrons are displayed in each panel. The error bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. Systematic uncertainties for the identified particles are shown as shaded bands around v2 = 0.

Minimum-bias (0–80% of the collision cross section) v2(pT ) for identified hadrons at |η| < 1 from Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. To facilitate comparisons between panels, v2 values for inclusive charged hadrons are displayed in each panel. The error bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. Systematic uncertainties for the identified particles are shown as shaded bands around v2 = 0.

Minimum-bias (0–80% of the collision cross section) v2(pT ) for identified hadrons at |η| < 1 from Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. To facilitate comparisons between panels, v2 values for inclusive charged hadrons are displayed in each panel. The error bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. Systematic uncertainties for the identified particles are shown as shaded bands around v2 = 0.

Minimum-bias (0–80% of the collision cross section) v2(pT ) for identified hadrons at |η| < 1 from Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. To facilitate comparisons between panels, v2 values for inclusive charged hadrons are displayed in each panel. The error bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. Systematic uncertainties for the identified particles are shown as shaded bands around v2 = 0.

Minimum-bias (0–80% of the collision cross section) v2(pT ) for identified hadrons at |η| < 1 from Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. To facilitate comparisons between panels, v2 values for inclusive charged hadrons are displayed in each panel. The error bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. Systematic uncertainties for the identified particles are shown as shaded bands around v2 = 0.

Minimum-bias (0–80% of the collision cross section) v2(pT ) for identified hadrons at |η| < 1 from Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. To facilitate comparisons between panels, v2 values for inclusive charged hadrons are displayed in each panel. The error bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. Systematic uncertainties for the identified particles are shown as shaded bands around v2 = 0.

Minimum-bias (0–80% of the collision cross section) v2(pT ) for identified hadrons at |η| < 1 from Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. To facilitate comparisons between panels, v2 values for inclusive charged hadrons are displayed in each panel. The error bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. Systematic uncertainties for the identified particles are shown as shaded bands around v2 = 0.

Minimum-bias (0–80% of the collision cross section) v2(pT ) for identified hadrons at |η| < 1 from Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. To facilitate comparisons between panels, v2 values for inclusive charged hadrons are displayed in each panel. The error bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. Systematic uncertainties for the identified particles are shown as shaded bands around v2 = 0.

Minimum-bias (0–80% of the collision cross section) v2(pT ) for identified hadrons at |η| < 1 from Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. To facilitate comparisons between panels, v2 values for inclusive charged hadrons are displayed in each panel. The error bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. Systematic uncertainties for the identified particles are shown as shaded bands around v2 = 0.

Minimum-bias (0–80% of the collision cross section) v2(pT ) for identified hadrons at |η| < 1 from Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. To facilitate comparisons between panels, v2 values for inclusive charged hadrons are displayed in each panel. The error bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. Systematic uncertainties for the identified particles are shown as shaded bands around v2 = 0.

Minimum-bias (0–80% of the collision cross section) v2(pT ) for identified hadrons at |η| < 1 from Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. To facilitate comparisons between panels, v2 values for inclusive charged hadrons are displayed in each panel. The error bars on the data points represent statistical uncertainties. Systematic uncertainties for the identified particles are shown as shaded bands around v2 = 0.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The unidentified charged hadron, charged pion, $K^0_S$, charged kaon, proton and Λ+Λ v2 as a function of pT for 10%–40%, 0%–10% and 40%–80% of the Au+Au interaction cross section at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. Weak-decay feed-down errors are included in the error bars on the data points while non-flow and tracking error uncertainties are plotted as bands around v2 = 0, which apply to all identified particles. The errors are asymmetric and the portion of the error band above (below) zero represents the negative (positive) error.

The ratio of Λ v2 to Λbar v2. The data are from minimum bias Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 and 200 GeV. The bands show the average values of the ratios within the indicated pT ranges.

The ratio of Λ v2 to Λbar v2. The data are from minimum bias Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 and 200 GeV. The bands show the average values of the ratios within the indicated pT ranges.

The pT integrated ratio of Λ v2 to Λbar v2 for three centrality intervals 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80%. The data are from Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 and 200 GeV.

The pT integrated ratio of Λ v2 to Λbar v2 for three centrality intervals 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80%. The data are from Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 and 200 GeV.

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

Identified particle v2 from minimum bias collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV scaled by the number of valence quarks in the hadron (nq) and plotted versus pT/nq (a) and (mT − m0)/nq (b). In each case a polynomial curve is fit to all particles except pions. The ratio of v2/nq to the fit function is shown in the bottom panels (c) and (d).

v2/nq scaled by the mean eccentricity of the initial overlap region versus (mT − m0)/nq for 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80% most central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV.

v2/nq scaled by the mean eccentricity of the initial overlap region versus (mT − m0)/nq for 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80% most central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV.

v2/nq scaled by the mean eccentricity of the initial overlap region versus (mT − m0)/nq for 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80% most central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV.

v2/nq scaled by the mean eccentricity of the initial overlap region versus (mT − m0)/nq for 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80% most central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV.

v2/nq scaled by the mean eccentricity of the initial overlap region versus (mT − m0)/nq for 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80% most central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV.

v2/nq scaled by the mean eccentricity of the initial overlap region versus (mT − m0)/nq for 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80% most central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV.

v2/nq scaled by the mean eccentricity of the initial overlap region versus (mT − m0)/nq for 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80% most central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV.

v2/nq scaled by the mean eccentricity of the initial overlap region versus (mT − m0)/nq for 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80% most central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV.

v2/nq scaled by the mean eccentricity of the initial overlap region versus (mT − m0)/nq for 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80% most central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV.

v2/nq scaled by the mean eccentricity of the initial overlap region versus (mT − m0)/nq for 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80% most central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV.

v2/nq scaled by the mean eccentricity of the initial overlap region versus (mT − m0)/nq for 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80% most central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV.

v2/nq scaled by the mean eccentricity of the initial overlap region versus (mT − m0)/nq for 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80% most central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV.

v2/nq scaled by the mean eccentricity of the initial overlap region versus (mT − m0)/nq for 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80% most central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV.

v2/nq scaled by the mean eccentricity of the initial overlap region versus (mT − m0)/nq for 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80% most central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV.

v2/nq scaled by the mean eccentricity of the initial overlap region versus (mT − m0)/nq for 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80% most central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV.

v2/nq scaled by the mean eccentricity of the initial overlap region versus (mT − m0)/nq for 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80% most central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV.

v2/nq scaled by the mean eccentricity of the initial overlap region versus (mT − m0)/nq for 0%–10%, 10%–40%, and 40%–80% most central Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 62.4 GeV.

Top panels - minimum bias $v_4$ for pions, charged kaons, $K^0_S$, anti-protons and Λ + Λbar at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. In the left panel the solid (dashed) line shows thevalue for $v_2^2$ for pions (kaons). Intheright panel the dashedline is $v_2^2$ for Λ + Λbar. Bottom panels - $v_4$ scaled by $v_2^2$ (points where $v_4$ and $v_2$ fluctuate around zero are not plotted). Grey bands correspond to the fit results described in the text and Table II. The systematic errors on the $v_4/v_2^2$ ratio from nonflow are included in the error bars leading to asymmetric errors.

Top panels - minimum bias $v_4$ for pions, charged kaons, $K^0_S$, anti-protons and Λ + Λbar at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. In the left panel the solid (dashed) line shows thevalue for $v_2^2$ for pions (kaons). Intheright panel the dashedline is $v_2^2$ for Λ + Λbar. Bottom panels - $v_4$ scaled by $v_2^2$ (points where $v_4$ and $v_2$ fluctuate around zero are not plotted). Grey bands correspond to the fit results described in the text and Table II. The systematic errors on the $v_4/v_2^2$ ratio from nonflow are included in the error bars leading to asymmetric errors.

Top panels - minimum bias $v_4$ for pions, charged kaons, $K^0_S$, anti-protons and Λ + Λbar at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. In the left panel the solid (dashed) line shows thevalue for $v_2^2$ for pions (kaons). Intheright panel the dashedline is $v_2^2$ for Λ + Λbar. Bottom panels - $v_4$ scaled by $v_2^2$ (points where $v_4$ and $v_2$ fluctuate around zero are not plotted). Grey bands correspond to the fit results described in the text and Table II. The systematic errors on the $v_4/v_2^2$ ratio from nonflow are included in the error bars leading to asymmetric errors.

Top panels - minimum bias $v_4$ for pions, charged kaons, $K^0_S$, anti-protons and Λ + Λbar at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. In the left panel the solid (dashed) line shows thevalue for $v_2^2$ for pions (kaons). Intheright panel the dashedline is $v_2^2$ for Λ + Λbar. Bottom panels - $v_4$ scaled by $v_2^2$ (points where $v_4$ and $v_2$ fluctuate around zero are not plotted). Grey bands correspond to the fit results described in the text and Table II. The systematic errors on the $v_4/v_2^2$ ratio from nonflow are included in the error bars leading to asymmetric errors.

Top panels - minimum bias $v_4$ for pions, charged kaons, $K^0_S$, anti-protons and Λ + Λbar at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. In the left panel the solid (dashed) line shows thevalue for $v_2^2$ for pions (kaons). Intheright panel the dashedline is $v_2^2$ for Λ + Λbar. Bottom panels - $v_4$ scaled by $v_2^2$ (points where $v_4$ and $v_2$ fluctuate around zero are not plotted). Grey bands correspond to the fit results described in the text and Table II. The systematic errors on the $v_4/v_2^2$ ratio from nonflow are included in the error bars leading to asymmetric errors.

Top panels - minimum bias $v_4$ for pions, charged kaons, $K^0_S$, anti-protons and Λ + Λbar at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. In the left panel the solid (dashed) line shows thevalue for $v_2^2$ for pions (kaons). Intheright panel the dashedline is $v_2^2$ for Λ + Λbar. Bottom panels - $v_4$ scaled by $v_2^2$ (points where $v_4$ and $v_2$ fluctuate around zero are not plotted). Grey bands correspond to the fit results described in the text and Table II. The systematic errors on the $v_4/v_2^2$ ratio from nonflow are included in the error bars leading to asymmetric errors.

Top panels - minimum bias $v_4$ for pions, charged kaons, $K^0_S$, anti-protons and Λ + Λbar at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. In the left panel the solid (dashed) line shows thevalue for $v_2^2$ for pions (kaons). Intheright panel the dashedline is $v_2^2$ for Λ + Λbar. Bottom panels - $v_4$ scaled by $v_2^2$ (points where $v_4$ and $v_2$ fluctuate around zero are not plotted). Grey bands correspond to the fit results described in the text and Table II. The systematic errors on the $v_4/v_2^2$ ratio from nonflow are included in the error bars leading to asymmetric errors.

Top panels - minimum bias $v_4$ for pions, charged kaons, $K^0_S$, anti-protons and Λ + Λbar at √sNN = 62.4 GeV. In the left panel the solid (dashed) line shows thevalue for $v_2^2$ for pions (kaons). Intheright panel the dashedline is $v_2^2$ for Λ + Λbar. Bottom panels - $v_4$ scaled by $v_2^2$ (points where $v_4$ and $v_2$ fluctuate around zero are not plotted). Grey bands correspond to the fit results described in the text and Table II. The systematic errors on the $v_4/v_2^2$ ratio from nonflow are included in the error bars leading to asymmetric errors.

Top panel - $v_2$ for pions and protons at √sNN = 62.4 and 17.3 GeV. The 62.4 GeV data are from TOF and dE/dx measurements combined. Middle and bottom panel - ratios of $v_2$ for $\pi^++\pi^-$, $K^0_S$, p+p, Λ+Λbar and at different center-of-mass energies scaled by the values at 62.4 GeV. The grey and yellow bands represent systematic uncertainties in the v2 ratios arising from non-flow effects. The grey bands (above unity) are the uncertainties for the 200 GeV/62.4 GeV data and the yellow bands (below unity) are for the 17.3 GeV/62.4 GeV data.

Top panel - $v_2$ for pions and protons at √sNN = 62.4 and 17.3 GeV. The 62.4 GeV data are from TOF and dE/dx measurements combined. Middle and bottom panel - ratios of $v_2$ for $\pi^++\pi^-$, $K^0_S$, p+p, Λ+Λbar and at different center-of-mass energies scaled by the values at 62.4 GeV. The grey and yellow bands represent systematic uncertainties in the v2 ratios arising from non-flow effects. The grey bands (above unity) are the uncertainties for the 200 GeV/62.4 GeV data and the yellow bands (below unity) are for the 17.3 GeV/62.4 GeV data.

Top panel - $v_2$ for pions and protons at √sNN = 62.4 and 17.3 GeV. The 62.4 GeV data are from TOF and dE/dx measurements combined. Middle and bottom panel - ratios of $v_2$ for $\pi^++\pi^-$, $K^0_S$, p+p, Λ+Λbar and at different center-of-mass energies scaled by the values at 62.4 GeV. The grey and yellow bands represent systematic uncertainties in the v2 ratios arising from non-flow effects. The grey bands (above unity) are the uncertainties for the 200 GeV/62.4 GeV data and the yellow bands (below unity) are for the 17.3 GeV/62.4 GeV data.

Top panel - $v_2$ for pions and protons at √sNN = 62.4 and 17.3 GeV. The 62.4 GeV data are from TOF and dE/dx measurements combined. Middle and bottom panel - ratios of $v_2$ for $\pi^++\pi^-$, $K^0_S$, p+p, Λ+Λbar and at different center-of-mass energies scaled by the values at 62.4 GeV. The grey and yellow bands represent systematic uncertainties in the v2 ratios arising from non-flow effects. The grey bands (above unity) are the uncertainties for the 200 GeV/62.4 GeV data and the yellow bands (below unity) are for the 17.3 GeV/62.4 GeV data.

Top panel - $v_2$ for pions and protons at √sNN = 62.4 and 17.3 GeV. The 62.4 GeV data are from TOF and dE/dx measurements combined. Middle and bottom panel - ratios of $v_2$ for $\pi^++\pi^-$, $K^0_S$, p+p, Λ+Λbar and at different center-of-mass energies scaled by the values at 62.4 GeV. The grey and yellow bands represent systematic uncertainties in the v2 ratios arising from non-flow effects. The grey bands (above unity) are the uncertainties for the 200 GeV/62.4 GeV data and the yellow bands (below unity) are for the 17.3 GeV/62.4 GeV data.

Top panel - $v_2$ for pions and protons at √sNN = 62.4 and 17.3 GeV. The 62.4 GeV data are from TOF and dE/dx measurements combined. Middle and bottom panel - ratios of $v_2$ for $\pi^++\pi^-$, $K^0_S$, p+p, Λ+Λbar and at different center-of-mass energies scaled by the values at 62.4 GeV. The grey and yellow bands represent systematic uncertainties in the v2 ratios arising from non-flow effects. The grey bands (above unity) are the uncertainties for the 200 GeV/62.4 GeV data and the yellow bands (below unity) are for the 17.3 GeV/62.4 GeV data.

Top panel - $v_2$ for pions and protons at √sNN = 62.4 and 17.3 GeV. The 62.4 GeV data are from TOF and dE/dx measurements combined. Middle and bottom panel - ratios of $v_2$ for $\pi^++\pi^-$, $K^0_S$, p+p, Λ+Λbar and at different center-of-mass energies scaled by the values at 62.4 GeV. The grey and yellow bands represent systematic uncertainties in the v2 ratios arising from non-flow effects. The grey bands (above unity) are the uncertainties for the 200 GeV/62.4 GeV data and the yellow bands (below unity) are for the 17.3 GeV/62.4 GeV data.

Top panel - $v_2$ for pions and protons at √sNN = 62.4 and 17.3 GeV. The 62.4 GeV data are from TOF and dE/dx measurements combined. Middle and bottom panel - ratios of $v_2$ for $\pi^++\pi^-$, $K^0_S$, p+p, Λ+Λbar and at different center-of-mass energies scaled by the values at 62.4 GeV. The grey and yellow bands represent systematic uncertainties in the v2 ratios arising from non-flow effects. The grey bands (above unity) are the uncertainties for the 200 GeV/62.4 GeV data and the yellow bands (below unity) are for the 17.3 GeV/62.4 GeV data.

FIG. 1: (a) Raw two-particle correlation signal $Y_2$ (red), background $aB_{inc}F_2$ (solid histogram), and background systematic uncertainty from a (dashed histograms). (b) Background-subtracted two-particle correlation $\hat{Y}_2$ (red), and systematic uncertainties due to a (dashed histograms) and flow (blue histograms). (c) Raw three-particle correlation $Y_3$. (d) $ba^2Y_{inc}^2$ . (e) Sum of trig-corr-bkgd and trigger flow. Data are from 12% central Au+Au collisions. Statistical errors in (a,b) are smaller than the point size.

FIG. 1: (a) Raw two-particle correlation signal $Y_2$ (red), background $aB_{inc}F_2$ (solid histogram), and background systematic uncertainty from a (dashed histograms). (b) Background-subtracted two-particle correlation $\hat{Y}_2$ (red), and systematic uncertainties due to a (dashed histograms) and flow (blue histograms). (c) Raw three-particle correlation $Y_3$. (d) $ba^2Y_{inc}^2$ . (e) Sum of trig-corr-bkgd and trigger flow. Data are from 12% central Au+Au collisions. Statistical errors in (a,b) are smaller than the point size.

FIG. 2: Background subtracted three-particle correlations, $\hat{Y}_3$, for (a) pp, (b) d+Au, (c) 80-50% Au+Au, (d) 50-30% Au+Au, (e) 30-10% Au+Au, and (f) 12% central Au+Au. Statistical errors per bin are approximately $\pm$0.012 in (a) and $\pm$0.006 in (b), both at ($\pi$, $\pi$), and are $\pm$0.022, $\pm$0.049, $\pm$0.099 and $\pm$0.077 from (c) to (f), similar for all bins.

FIG. 2: Background subtracted three-particle correlations, $\hat{Y}_3$, for (a) pp, (b) d+Au, (c) 80-50% Au+Au, (d) 50-30% Au+Au, (e) 30-10% Au+Au, and (f) 12% central Au+Au. Statistical errors per bin are approximately $\pm$0.012 in (a) and $\pm$0.006 in (b), both at ($\pi$, $\pi$), and are $\pm$0.022, $\pm$0.049, $\pm$0.099 and $\pm$0.077 from (c) to (f), similar for all bins.

FIG. 2: Background subtracted three-particle correlations, $\hat{Y}_3$, for (a) pp, (b) d+Au, (c) 80-50% Au+Au, (d) 50-30% Au+Au, (e) 30-10% Au+Au, and (f) 12% central Au+Au. Statistical errors per bin are approximately $\pm$0.012 in (a) and $\pm$0.006 in (b), both at ($\pi$, $\pi$), and are $\pm$0.022, $\pm$0.049, $\pm$0.099 and $\pm$0.077 from (c) to (f), similar for all bins.

FIG. 2: Background subtracted three-particle correlations, $\hat{Y}_3$, for (a) pp, (b) d+Au, (c) 80-50% Au+Au, (d) 50-30% Au+Au, (e) 30-10% Au+Au, and (f) 12% central Au+Au. Statistical errors per bin are approximately $\pm$0.012 in (a) and $\pm$0.006 in (b), both at ($\pi$, $\pi$), and are $\pm$0.022, $\pm$0.049, $\pm$0.099 and $\pm$0.077 from (c) to (f), similar for all bins.

FIG. 2: Background subtracted three-particle correlations, $\hat{Y}_3$, for (a) pp, (b) d+Au, (c) 80-50% Au+Au, (d) 50-30% Au+Au, (e) 30-10% Au+Au, and (f) 12% central Au+Au. Statistical errors per bin are approximately $\pm$0.012 in (a) and $\pm$0.006 in (b), both at ($\pi$, $\pi$), and are $\pm$0.022, $\pm$0.049, $\pm$0.099 and $\pm$0.077 from (c) to (f), similar for all bins.

FIG. 2: Background subtracted three-particle correlations, $\hat{Y}_3$, for (a) pp, (b) d+Au, (c) 80-50% Au+Au, (d) 50-30% Au+Au, (e) 30-10% Au+Au, and (f) 12% central Au+Au. Statistical errors per bin are approximately $\pm$0.012 in (a) and $\pm$0.006 in (b), both at ($\pi$, $\pi$), and are $\pm$0.022, $\pm$0.049, $\pm$0.099 and $\pm$0.077 from (c) to (f), similar for all bins.

Projections of away-side three-particle correlations along the diagonal $\Sigma$ within 0 < $\Delta$ < 0.35 (squares) and along the off-diagonal $\Delta$ within |$\Sigma$| < 0.35 (points) in (a) d+Au and (b) 12% central Au+Au collisions. The shaded areas indicate systematic uncertainties on the off-diagonal projections. The histogram in (a) is the near-side off-diagonal projection. The histogram in (b) is the away-side off-diagonal projection of our result with a = b = 1. NOTE: For points with invisible error bars, the point size was considered as an absolute upper limit for the uncertainty.

Projections of away-side three-particle correlations along the diagonal $\Sigma$ within 0 < $\Delta$ < 0.35 (squares) and along the off-diagonal $\Delta$ within |$\Sigma$| < 0.35 (points) in (a) d+Au and (b) 12% central Au+Au collisions. The shaded areas indicate systematic uncertainties on the off-diagonal projections. The histogram in (a) is the near-side off-diagonal projection. The histogram in (b) is the away-side off-diagonal projection of our result with a = b = 1. NOTE: For points with invisible error bars, the point size was considered as an absolute upper limit for the uncertainty.

Three-particle correlation strength per radian$^2$ versus ($N_{part}$/2)$^{1/3}$ where $N_{part}$ is the number of participants. Some of the data points have been displaced in $N_{part}$ for clarity.

FIG. 7. Left: Parameters $n$ and $n_{h} / \tilde{n}_{s}$ vs $\hat{n}_{\mathrm{ch}}$ from free $\chi^{2}$ fits (solid symbols) in Table I. The open symbols represent similar free fits but with $\bar{y}_{t}$ held fixed at $2.65$ (see text for discussion). The bands represent the corresponding two-component fixed parametrizations with their stated errors also given in Table $I$. Right: Ratio $n_{h}\left(\hat{n}_{\mathrm{ch}}\right) / n_{s}\left(\hat{n}_{\mathrm{ch}}\right)$ derived from integrals in Fig. 4 (left panel) (open squares) and from Gaussian amplitudes in Fig. 5 (left panel) (solid dots). The dashed and dotted lines have slopes $0.105$ and $0.095$, respectively. The solid curve is described in the text. NOTE: For points with invisible error bars, the point size was considered as an absolute upper limit for the uncertainty.

FIG. 8. $\left\langle p_{t}\right\rangle\left(\hat{n}_{\mathrm{ch}}\right)$ derived from the two-component $H_{0}$ Gaussian amplitudes (solid dots), from the running integrals (open squares), and from power-law fits to STAR and UA1 data (open FIG. 8. $\left\langle p_{t}\right\rangle\left(\hat{n}_{\mathrm{ch}}\right)$ derived from the two-component $H_{0}$ Gaussian amplitudes (solid dots), from the running integrals (open squares), and from power-law fits to STAR and UA1 data (open circles, triangles). The solid and dotted lines correspond to Eq. (6) with $\alpha=0.0095$ and $0.015$, respectively.circles, triangles). The solid and dotted lines correspond to Eq. (6) with $\alpha=0.0095$ and $0.015$, respectively. NOTE 1: For points with invisible error bars, the point size was considered as an absolute upper limit for the uncertainty. NOTE 2: The "ext" uncertainty corresponds to the systematic uncertainty of the extrapolation of the particle yield below $p_T < 0.2 GeV/c$ (hatched region).