arxiv:hep-ph/ v1 15 Jan 2001

Transcription

1 BOSE-EINSTEIN CORRELATIONS IN CASCADE PROCESSES AND NON-EXTENSIVE STATISTICS O.V.UTYUZH AND G.WILK The Andrzej So tan Institute for Nucear Studies; Hoża 69; Warsaw, Poand E-mai: and arxiv:hep-ph/ v1 15 Jan 2001 Z.W LODARCZYK Institute of Physics, Pedagogica University; Konopnickiej 15; Kiece, Poand E-mai: We discuss the effect of nonextensivity of the emitting source on the Bose-Einstein correations (BEC). This is done numericay by comparing cascade hadronization mode (CAS), which is known to exhibit fracta structure in both space-time and phase-space, with its equivaent obtained from the information theory approach (MaxEnt), in which hadronization proceeds uniformy in the phase-space. To this end we have deveoped a new method of accounting for BEC in Monte Caro event generators, which preserves a kinematics of the hadronization process. Some time ago probem of sensitivity of Bose-Einstein correations (BEC) 1 to the possibe fracta structure of emmiting hadronic source has been formuated 2. Recenty we have addressed this probem numericay by modeing such source in terms of the cascade process taking pace both in phase-space and in space-time 3,4. In addition to the expected feature of intermittency observed in its mutipartice distributions it aso shows a kind of modified Lévy distribution in space-time variabes, which can be interpreted as a signa of nonextensivity arising due to the space-time fracta structure of such source 5. It is worth to notice at this point about recent investigations of the possibe continuous emission from the otherwise hydrodynamicay described expanding hadronic source, which eads aso to a kind of foam-ike (mutifracta) space-time structure noticeaby infuencing the BEC 6. As we have demonstrated 4 BEC are, indeed, sensitive to the nonextensivity parameter q which infuences spacio-tempora deveopment of the cascade process, i.e., its fractaity. They are aso sensitive to the particuar ( sow or fast ) way in which cascade deveops (quantified by the mean ife-time of the cascade ink parameter τ 3,4 ). However, in 4 we did not compare expicitey nonextensive (such as cascade) approach to hadronization with an extensive one, our anaysis concerned properties of the cascade process itsef. Such comparison wi be performed here. However, the afterburner method of incorporating BEC into event generators 7 used in 3,4 is not satisfactory for this purpose because tihany: submitted to Word Scientific on February 28,

2 it changes the origina event, making comparison of events coming from different hadronization modes very difficut. The more satisfactory weighting procedures 8,9 are, on the other hand, too much compicated for our purposes. The same is true for procedures reying on shifting of momenta 10, which in addition aso change the initia energy-momentum baance. We sha propose instead a new, simpe procedure of modeing BEC, which preserves both the energy-momenta of a produced secondaries and their tota mutipicity distributions (as we as their intermittency pattern). It changes, however, the charge aocation (if any) of the produced secondaries, preserving at the same time both the tota charge of the initia source and mutipicities of charged and neutra secondaries resuting from a given event generator. Suppose that in the th event ( = 1,...,N event ) our generator provides us with n = n (+) + n ( ) + n (0) partices. Keeping their energymomenta and spacio-tempora positions intact we sha now aocated to them anew the charges and this wi be done in the foowing way: 1. One chooses randomy, with weights proportiona to p (+) = n (+) /n, p ( ) = n ( ) /n and p (0) = n (0) /n, the SIGN (from: +, - or 0 ) and attaches it to the partice (i) chosen randomy from partices produced in this event and sti remaining without charges. 2. One cacuates distances in momenta, δ ij (p) = p i p j, between the chosen partice (i) and a other partices sti without signs and arranges them in order of the ascending δ ij (p) with j = 1 denoting the most nearer neighbour of partice (i). To each δ ij (p) an appropriate weight P(i, j) is then assigned (the form of which wi be discussed beow). 3. One seects from a uniform distribution a random number r (0, 1). If n SIGN > 0 one checks the previousy seected partices in ascending order of j and if r < P(i, j) then charge SIGN is assigned aso to the partice (j), the mutipicity of partices with this SIGN is reduced by one, n SIGN = n SIGN 1, and next partice, j = j + 1, is seected from that bunch. If the new n SIGN = 0 one returns to point (1) but with the updated vaues of probabiities p (+), p ( ) and (0). However, if r > P(i, j) then one returns to (1), again with the updated vaues of p (+), p ( ) and p (0). Procedure finishes when n + = n = n 0 = 0, in which case one proceeds to the next event. It is important to reaize that the above method of choice of partices of the same SIGN eads to a geometrica (Bose-Einstein) distribution of partices in this group (ce) (for P(ij) = P =const its mean mutipicity equas P/(1 P), tihany: submitted to Word Scientific on February 28,

3 in fact because it contains aso n = 0, therefore in the agorithm it wi be greater by 1). In this way one accounts for the bosonic character (Bose- Einstein statistics) of the produced partices and after appication of this procedure they show strong tendency to occupy the same ce in the phasespace (defined, for exampe as wave packet in the momemtum space centered on the mean momentum of seected partices) 11. That this wi show up in the 2 partice BEC correation function C 2 (Q) = σ(p1,p2) σ(p > 1 for Q = p 1)σ(p 2) 1 p 2 0 was aready demonstrated in statistica mode based on information theory (with conservation of charges imposed) 12. One of the main parameters of this mode was the size of phase-space ces containing partices of the same charge, which was therefore fixed and the same for a events. In our case both the sizes of phase-space ces and their number depend cruciay on the weight parameters P(ij) and can therefore vary both from event to event and aso in a given event. Notice that, because we do not imit a priori the number of partices which can be put into given ce, we are, in fact, getting in this way automaticay BEC of a orders. It means that C 2 presented in Figs. 1 and 2 are cacuated in the environmnet of mutipartice BEC and as such can exceed 2 at some circumstances (as demonstrated in 9 ). It is instructive to reaize what kind of dynamica picture this method corresponds to in the case of cascade mode. Notice that we do not change initia energy-momentum fow here, however, we do profoundy change the initia charge fow resuting from our event generator. Taking any exampe of cascade described in 3, aocating to fina secondaries charges according to the proposed procedure and working then charge fow backwards, one encounters strong charge fuctuations with mutipe charges occuring in branching vertices, which were not present there originay (at the same time tota charge of the whoe system is on every cascade step aways equa to the initia charge of the mass M initiating cascade). This observation is, in fact, a genera one: precisey the aowance for such charge fuctuations eads to the occurence of ike-charge bunching, which in turn, are interpreted as effect of BEC. In our case one coud argue that such muticharged vertices shoud be introduced into the scheme of the hadronization cascade process itsef (i.e., aready into our Monte Caro event generator). This is, however, an impossibe task because it eads to unsurmountabe probems with their subsequent proper deexcitation to singe charged fina partices. The reaxation of contro over the initia charge fow (or ack of such atogether) is therefore necessary condition of appicabiity of the proposed agorithm. As in a other approaches it wi be important what kind of weight factors P(ij) we sha choose. Two such choices wi be demonstrated here: P(ij) = tihany: submitted to Word Scientific on February 28,

4 const = 0.5 and P(ij) = exp[ 1 2 δ2 ij (x) δ2 ij (p)]. This ater form uses the avaiabe information on the partice production provided by event generator. One can argue that this is, in a sense, a the most natura form because of the foowing: if partices (ij) woud be described by the wave packets in the space-time, their widths woud foow momentum separation δ ij (p) and the corresponding probabiity distribution in δ ij (x) woud be of the above gaussian form. Figure 1. Comparison of BEC for CAS (eft panes) and MaxEnt (right panes) types of the emmiting one-dimensiona sources of masses M = 100, 40 and 10 GeV for constant vaue of parameter P = 0.5 (see text for detais). Figure 2. The same as in Fig. (1) but for the most natura choice of P and for two different types of cascade evoution characterized by constant τ = 0.2 fm - fu symbos - and mass-dependent τ = 1/M - open symbos - (see text for detais). With this agorithm we can now easiy compare the truy fracta source of hadronization provided by the cascade (CAS) with the most simpe one corresponding to the instantenous hadronization in the whoe avaiabe phase space, as - for exampe - provided by the maximaization of the information entropy approach (MaxEnt) 13. This is done in the foowing way: to each CAS event characterized by the mutipicity n one buids the corresponding MaxEnt event according to the procedure outined in 13 (i.e., one cacuates the corresponding agrange mutipier β or temperature T = 1 β ). Using now the same mutipicities, n, n (+), n ( ) and n (0), as in CAS one cacuates tihany: submitted to Word Scientific on February 28,

5 the corresponding BEC. The resuts for constant weight P are given in Fig. 1 whereas Fig. 2 contains resuts using the most natura choice of the weights P(ij). In the case on MaxEnt we argue that it is given by the foowing ] [ (pi pj)2 2kµ T T form: P(ij) = exp. Here p i,j are the momenta of the partices considered, µ T denotes their transverse mass, k is Botzmann constant and T is the mentioned above temperature of the th event. Tabe 1. List of parameters γ, λ and R (in fm) fitting data shown in Figs. 1 and 2 by the foowing formua: C 2 (Q) = γ [1 + λ exp( R Q)]. M 10 GeV 40 GeV 100 GeV Mode used: CAS MaxEnt CAS MaxEnt CAS MaxEnt γ Fig. 1 λ R γ Fig. 2 λ (τ = 0.2) R γ Fig. 2 λ (τ = 1/M) R Our preiminary resuts are presented in Figs. 1 and 2 for one-dimensiona case ony (first 3 dimensiona anaysis of CAS is provided in 3,4 ). The reference event for CAS was the origina cascade itsef, which do not shows any BEC effect at a (actuay, the mixed-event method appied to MaxEnt gives in this case identica resut). To faciitate estimations of differences between pictures presented in Figs. 1 and 2, we have isted in Tabe 1 parameters of simpe exponentia ike parametrization of these resuts. There are some features worth of noticing. Fig. 1 demonstrates that constant (i.e., independent on the detais of the hadronizing source given by event generators) weights ead to very simiar BEC pattern in both types of modes. It is given entirey by the number of partices of the same charge in a given ce, which depends on P (the bigger P the more partices and bigger C 2 (Q = 0); smaer P eads to increasing number of ces, which resuts in decreasing C 2 (Q = 0), as was aready noticed in 11 ). Ony by making P depending on the detais of hadronization process, as in Fig. 2, we start to see differences between modes. But even in this case they are rather weak and C 2 depends on the parameters of the hadronic source ony as much as they infuence the number of eementary ces and mutipicities in them. Thererfore the size R isted in Tabe 1 corresponds to the size of eementary ce rather than to the size of the hadronizing source (in fact for τ = 0.2 fm the rea size of CAS source grows from 0.29 fm for M = 10 GeV to 1.61 fm for M = 100 GeV and for τ = 1/M tihany: submitted to Word Scientific on February 28,

6 from 0.12 fm to 0.62 fm, respectivey). There is noticeaby difference between CAS and MaxEnt cases for sow cascades (τ = 0.2 fm 3 ). For fast ones (with τ = 1/M, where partices are produced much earier and more uniform) both the extensive MaxEnt and nonextensive CAS schemes ead to simiar BEC. More detaied anaysis of this approach, with its appication aso to the 3 dimensiona case wi be presented esewhere. Acknowedgments One of the Authors (GW) woud ike to thank Tamas Csörgő and a the Organizers of XXX-th ISMD for their kind hospitaity and the Hungarian Academy of Sciences for its financia support. The partia support of Poish Committee for Scientific Research (grants 2P03B and 621/E-78/SPUB/CERN/P- 03/DZ4/99) is acknowedged. References 1. R.M.Weiner, Phys. Rep. 327, 249 (2000); U.A.Wiedemann and U.Heinz, Phys. Rep. 319, 145 (1999). 2. A.Bia as, Acta Phys. Poon. B 23, 561 (1992) and Nuc. Phys. A 545, 285c (1992); J.Pi sút, N.Pi sútová and B.Tomásik, Acta Phys. Sov. 46, 517 (1996). 3. O.V.Utyuzh, G.Wik and Z.W odarczyk, Phys. Rev. D 61, (2000). 4. O.V.Utyuzh, G.Wik and Z.W odarczyk, Czech J. Phys. 50/S2, 132 (2000) (hep-ph/ ). 5. C.Tsais, Braz. J. Phys. 29, 1 (1999) (avaiabe aso at http: //sbf.if. usp.br/www pages/journas/bjp/vo29/num1/index.htm). 6. F.Grassi, Y.Hama, S.S.Padua and O.Socooski, Jr., Phys. Rev. C 62, (2000). 7. K.Geiger, J.Eis, U.Heinz and U.A.Wiedemann, Phys. Rev. D 61, (2000); J.P.Suivan et a., Phys. Rev. Lett. 70, 3000 (1993). 8. A.Bia as and A.Krzywicki, Phys. Lett. B 354, 134 (1995); K.Fia kowski, R.Wit and J.Wosiek, Phys. Rev. D 58, (1998). 9. T.Wibig, Phys. Rev. D 53, 3586 (1996). 10. L.Lönnbad and T.Sjöstrand, Eur. Phys. J. C 2, 165 (1998). 11. M.Biyajima, N.Suzuki, G.Wik and Z.W odarczyk, Phys. Lett. B 386, 297 (1996). 12. T.Osada, M.Maruyama and F.Takagi, Phys. Rev. D 59, (1999). 13. G.Wik and Z.W odarczyk, Phys. Rev. D 43, 794 (1991). tihany: submitted to Word Scientific on February 28,