Kinetic freeze-out temperature and flow velocity extracted from transverse momentum spectra of final-state light flavor particles produced in collisions at RHIC and LHC Hua-Rong Wei a, Fu-Hu Liu a,, and Roy A. Lacey b, a Institute of Theoretical Physics, Shanxi University, Taiyuan, Shanxi 030006, China b Departments of Chemistry & Physics, Stony Brook University, Stony Brook, NY 794, USA arxiv:60.07045v3 [hep-ph] 9 Apr 06 Abstract: The transverse momentum spectra of final-state light flavor particles produced in proton-proton (p-p), copper-copper (Cu-Cu), gold-gold (Au-Au), lead-lead (Pb- Pb), and proton-lead (p-pb) collisions for different centralities at relativistic heavy ion collider (RHIC) and large hadron collider (LHC) energies are studied in the framework of a multisource thermal model. The experimental data measured by the STAR, CMS, and ALICE Collaborations are consistent with the results calculated by the multi-component Erlang distribution and Tsallis Statistics. The effective temperature and real temperature (kinetic freeze-out temperature) of interacting system at the stage of kinetic freeze-out, the mean transverse flow velocity and mean flow velocity of particles, and the relationships between them are extracted. The dependences of effective temperature and mean (transverse) momentum on rest mass, moving mass, centrality, and center-of-mass energy, and the dependences of kinetic freeze-out temperature and mean (transverse) flow velocity on centrality, center-of-mass energy, and system size are obtained. Keywords: Kinetic freeze-out temperature, Flow and transverse flow velocities, Transverse momentum spectrum, Erlang distribution, Tsallis statistics PACS:.38.Mh, 5.75.Dw, 4.0.Pa Introduction Since the relativistic heavy ion collider (RHIC) and large hadron collider (LHC) successfully run, the evolution process of collision system and properties of quark-gluon plasma (QGP) [] formed in a high-temperature and high-density extreme condition, attract more interests and studies. Many theoretical and experimental methods are used to study the high energy nucleus-nucleus collisions which result in multi-particle productions. The model analysis is a simple but effective method in the study of high energy nucleus-nucleus collisions. It can extract the information of interacting system and QGP by analyzing various spectra of final-state products with distribution laws of different models. For example, by using the blast-wave model [], thermal and statistical model E-mail: fuhuliu@63.com; fuhuliu@sxu.edu.cn E-mail: Roy.Lacey@Stonybrook.edu
[3], Landau hydrodynamic model [4 7], multisource thermal model [8 0], and so forth, one can describe transverse momentum (mass) spectrum, azimuthal distribution, and rapidity distribution of final-state products to extract temperature, non-equilibrium degree, longitudinal extension, and speed of sound of interacting system, and flow velocity and chemical potential of particles [ 4], especially at the state of kinetic freeze-out, which renders that model analyzes have made great contributions to study the properties of reaction system and QGP, as well as new physics. In high energy collisions, the interacting system at the kinetic freeze-out (the last stage of collisions) stays at a thermodynamic equilibrium state or local equilibrium state, when the particle emission process is influenced by not only the thermal motion but also the flow effect. In other words, it is interesting to study the temperature of interacting system and flow velocity of particles at the stage of kinetic freeze-out. The effective temperature extracted from the transverse momentum spectrum [5 5] includes thermal motion and flow effect of particles, where the thermal motion is actually the reflection of the real temperature of emission source. From dissecting the effective temperature, it is possible to obtain the real temperature of interacting system (kinetic freeze-out temperature) and mean (transverse) flow velocity of particles. The relationships between effective temperature, real temperature, flow velocity are not totally clear. Although the theories of studying kinetic freeze-out temperature are many, their results are different from each other in some cases. This indicates that studying more their relations is important and needful. In the present work, we use the Erlang distribution with one-, two-, or three-component and Tsallis statistics in the multisource thermal model [8 0] to describe the transverse momentum spectra of final-state particles produced in proton-proton(p-p), copper-copper (Cu-Cu), gold-gold (Au-Au), lead-lead (Pb-Pb), and proton-lead (p-pb) collisions with different centrality intervals over a s NN (center-of-mass energy per nucleon pair) or s (only for p-p collision in some cases) range fro. to 7 TeV. The Monte Carlo method is used to calculate the results and to see the statistical fluctuations in the process of calculation. The calculated results are compared with the experimental data of the STAR [5 9], CMS [0], and ALICE [ 5] Collaborations. From comparison and analysis, the kinetic freeze-out temperature of interacting system, mean transverse flow velocity and mean flow velocity of particles, and their relations are then extracted. The structure of the present work is as followings. The model and formulism are shortly described in section. Results and discussion are given in section 3. In section 4, we summarize our main observations and conclusions. The model and formulism The present work is based on the multisource thermal model [8 0], which assumes that many emission sources are formed in high energy collisions. Due to the existent of different interacting mechanisms in collisions and measurement of different event samples in experiments, these sources are classified into a few groups. Generally, we assume that sources in the same group stay at a local equilibrium state, which means they have the same excitation degree and a common temperature. The emission process of all the
sources in different groups results in the final-state spectrum, which can be described by a multi-component distribution law, because of a local equilibrium state corresponding to a singular distribution. Using different distributions to describe transverse momentum ( ) spectra of final-state particles can obtain different information. For example, a multicomponent Erlang distribution can directly give the mean transverse momentum of each group, while the Tsallis statistics can show the effective temperature of the whole interacting system which may have group-by-group fluctuations in different local thermal equilibriums. According to the model [0], particles generated from one emission source is assumed to obey an exponential function of transverse momentum distribution f ij (p tij ) = [ p tij exp p ] tij, () p tij where p tij is the transverse momentum contributed by the ith source in the jth group, and p tij is the mean value of p tij. All the sources in the jth group results in the folding of exponential functions f j ( ) = p m j [ T (m j )! p tij exp p ] T, () m j p tij wherem j isthesource number inthejthgroup, and denotesthetransverse momentum contributed by the m j sources. This is the Erlang distribution. The contribution of all l groups of sources can be expressed as l f E ( ) = k j f j ( ), (3) j= where k j denotes the relative weight contributed by the jth group and meets the normalization l j= k j =. This is the multi-component Erlang distribution. Then, using the inverse slope parameter p tij, we can obtain the mean transverse momentum of final-state particles to be l = k j m j p tij. (4) j= The Tsallis statistics is in fact the sum of contributions of two or three standard distributions. Although the Tsallis statistics does not give each local temperature like multi-component distribution which reveals fluctuations from a local equilibrium state to another one, it use an average temperature of the whole interacting system to describe the effect of local temperature fluctuations. So, the Tsallis statistics is widely used in high energy collisions [6 35]. According to the Tsallis statistics [6 3], we use the formalism of unit-density function of and rapidity (y) d N [ = C p T dydp +coshy T + q T ] q p q T +coshy, (5) 3
where N is the number of particles, C = gv/(π) is the normalization constant, g and V are degeneracy factor and volume respectively, is the rest mass of considered particle, T is the mean effective temperature over fluctuations in different groups, and q (q > ) is the factor (entropy index) to characterize the degree of non-equilibrium among different groups. With an integral for y in Eq. (5), the normalized Tsallis distribution is obtained and can be written as f T ( ) = N dn ymax [ = C T p T dp + coshy T y min + q T ] q p q T +coshy dy, (6) where C T denotes the normalization constant which results in 0 f T ( )d =, y min is the minimum rapidity, and y max is the maximum rapidity. Based on the above two distributions, we can use the Monte Carlo method to obtain a series of. Under the assumption of isotropic emission in the source rest frame, the space angle θ and azimuthal angel φ of particles satisfy the distributions of f θ (θ) = (/)sinθ and f φ (φ) = /(π) respectively. By the Monte Carlo method, a series of θ and φ are obtained. Correspondingly, the x-component, y-component, and (longitudinal) z-component of momentum are p x = cosφ, p y = sinφ, and p z = /tanθ, respectively. Then, the momentum p = /sinθ or p = p T +p z, the energy E = p +m 0, the Lorentz factor γ = / (p/e), and the moving mass m = γ, as well as their averages, p, γ, and m are acquired. Particularly, the values of mean transverse momentums according to analytical function and Monte Carlo method are almost the same. 3 Results and discussion Figure presents the transverse momentum spectra of various identified hadrons produced in p-p collision at center-of-mass energy (a) s = 0., (b) 0.9, (d).76, and (e) (f) 7 TeV, where N EV on the axis denotes the number of inelastic collisions events. The symbols represent the experimental data of (a) π +, K +, and p measured by the STAR Collaboration at midrapidity y < 0. [5], (b) (d) (e) π +, K +, and p measured by the CMS Collaboration in the range y < [0], Λ, φ, and Ξ + Ξ + measured by the ALICE Collaboration in the range y < 0.8 [], as well as (f) Ξ and Ω measured by the ALICE Collaboration in the range y < []. The errors include both the statistical and systematic errors. The solid and dashed curves are our results calculated by using the one- or two-component Erlang distribution and Tsallis statistics, respectively. The values of free parameters (m, p ti, k, m, and p ti ), normalization constant (N E0 ), and χ per degree of freedom (χ /dof) corresponding to the one- or two-component Erlang distribution are listed in Table, and the values of free parameters (T and q), normalization constant (N T0 ), and χ /dof corresponding to the Tsallis statistics are given in Table, where the normalization constants (N E0 and N T0 ) are used for comparisons between the normalized curves and data points. In particular, the value of χ /dof for Ξ + Ξ + in Figure is in fact the value of χ due to the number of data points being less than that of parameters. One can see that the one- or two-component Erlang distribution and Tsallis statistics describe the experimental data of the considered particles in p-p collision 4
at different energies. From Tables and, one can see that the numbers of sources in different groups are, 3, or 4. The effective temperature T increases and the non-equilibrium degree parameter q decreases with increase of rest mass, which reflects non-simultaneous productions of different types of particles, while T and q increase with increase of centerof-mass energy. The normalization constants N E0 and N T0 decrease with increase of rest mass, and increase with increase of center-of-mass energy. It is interesting to note that the product of T and q increases with increase of rest mass and center-of-mass energy. Figure shows the transverse momentum spectra of (a) KS 0, (b) Λ, Ξ, and (d) Ω producedincu-cucollisionsat s NN = 0.TeV.Thesymbolsrepresent theexperimental data of the STAR Collaboration in y < and different centrality (C) intervals of 0 0%, 0 30%, and 40 60% [6]. The error bars are combined statistical and systematic errors. The solid and dashed curves are our results calculated by using the one- or twocomponent Erlang distribution and Tsallis statistics, respectively. For clarity, the results for different intervals are scaled by different amounts shown in the panels. The values of free parameters, normalization constants, and χ /dof are displayed in Tables and. Obviously, the one- or two-component Erlang distribution and Tsallis statistics describe well the experimental data of the considered particles in 0. TeV Cu-Cu collisions with different centrality intervals. The numbers of sources in different groups are,, 3, or 4. The parameter T increases and the parameter q decreases with increases of rest mass and centrality. The product of T and q increases with increases of rest mass and centrality. The parameters N E0 and N T0 decrease with increases of rest mass and decrease of centrality. The spectra of (a) π + for y <, (b) KS 0 for y <, p for y <, (d) φ for y <, (e) Λ for y <, and (f) Ξ for y < 0.75 produced in Au-Au collisions at s NN = 0. TeV as a function of centrality are given in Figure 3. The experimental data were recorded by the STAR Collaboration [7 9], and scale factors for different centralities are applied to the spectra in the panels for clarity. The uncertainties on the data points for π +, KS, 0 p, and Λ are statistical and systematic combined. While the uncertainties for φ and Ξ are only statistical uncertainties and systematic uncertainties respectively. The results calculated by using the one-, two-, or three-component Erlang distribution and Tsallis statistics are shown in the solid and dashed curves, respectively. The values of free parameters (m, p ti, k, m, and p ti ), normalization constant, and χ /dof corresponding to the one- or two-component Erlang distribution in Figures 3(b) 3(f) are listed in Table. The values of free parameters (m, p ti, k, m, p ti, k, m 3, and p ti3 ), normalization constant, and χ /dof corresponding to the three-component Erlang distribution in Figure 3(a) are listed in Table 3. The values of free parameters, normalization constant, and χ /dof corresponding to the Tsallis statistics are given in Table. Once more, the two types of distributions are in good agreement with the experimental data of the considered particles in 0. TeV Au-Au collisions with different centrality intervals. The numbers of sources in different groups are,, 3, or 4. The parameter T increases and the parameter q decreases with increases of rest mass and centrality. The product of T and q increases with increases of rest mass and centrality. ThenormalizationconstantsN E0 andn T0 decreasewithincreaseofrestmassanddecrease of centrality. The spectra of (a) π +, (b) K +, p, and (d) φ produced in central (0 5%), semi- 5
central (50 60%), and peripheral (80 90%) Pb-Pb collisions at s NN =.76 TeV are displayed in Figure 4. The symbols represent the experimental data measured by the ALICE Collaboration at midrapidity y < [3, 4]. The uncertainties on the data points are combined statistical and systematic ones. The fitted results with the oneor two-component Erlang distribution and Tsallis statistics are plotted by the solid and dashed curves, respectively. The values of free parameters, normalization constants, and χ /dof are exhibited in Tables and. As can be seen, the two types of distribution laws are consistent with the experimental data of the considered particles in.76 TeV Pb-Pb collisions with different centrality classes. The numbers of sources in different groups are,, or 3. The effective temperature T increases with increases of rest mass and centrality. The parameter q decreases with increases of rest mass and centrality. The product of T and q increases with increases of rest mass and centrality. The parameters N E0 and N T0 decrease with increase of rest mass and decrease of centrality. Figure 5 exhibits the spectra of (a) π + + π, (b) K + + K, p + p, and (d) Λ + Λ produced in central (0 5%), semi-central (40 60%), and peripheral (80 00%) p-pb collisions at s NN = 5.0 TeV. The ALICE experimental data in 0 < y < are represented by different symbols [5]. The error bars are combined statistical and systematic errors. Our results analyzed by the two-component Erlang distribution and Tsallis statistics are given by the solid and dashed curves, respectively. The values of free parameters, normalization constants, and χ /dof are summarized in Tables and. Once again, the experimental data can be well described by the two types of fit functions for spectra in all centrality bins. The numbers of sources in different groups are, 3, or 4. The effective temperature T increases with increases of rest mass and centrality. With increases of rest mass and centrality, the parameters q, N E0, and N T0 decrease, and the product of T and q increases. In the above descriptions, it is easy to notice that the numbers of sources m j in the jth group are in the range m j 4. The m j is so small that we think these sources corresponding to a few partons which include sea and valent quarks and gluons in highenergy collisions. Generally, the transverse momentum spectrum is contributed by the sum of soft and hard parts. The soft excitation process is a strong interacting process where a few sea quarks andgluons taken part in, and the hard scattering process is a more violent collision among a few valent quarks in incident nucleons. In spectrum, the soft excitationandhardscatteringprocesses correspondtoanarrowlow- andawidehigh- regions respectively [36 38]. And in the describing by two-component Erlang distribution, the first and second components correspond to the soft and hard processes respectively. Although the low- region contributed by soft process is narrow, the contribution of soft excitation is main, which can be seen from the relative weight k > 50%. Particularly, when the region of spectrum is narrow enough, the two-component Erlang distribution actually is the (one-component) Erlang distribution for the contribution of the second component being neglected. On the contrary, when the high- region is very wide, the hard process can not be described by one component distribution, which means the two-component distribution would expand to the three-component Erlang distribution. The temperature parameter T extracted from the Tsallis distribution is actually the effective temperature of emission sources, which can not reflect the transverse excitation of interacting system at the stage of kinetic freeze-out. In order to obtain the real temper- 6
ature(kinetic freeze-out temperature) of emission sources and(transverse) flow velocity of final-state particles, we study the linear dependences of mean transverse momentum, mean momentum p, and effective temperatures T on particle rest mass and mean moving mass m. Figures 6 8 show the center-of-mass energy and centrality dependences of, p, and T on respectively, and Figures 9 show that on m respectively. One can see that the three quantities, p, and T increase with increase of and m. From p-p collision, the three quantities increase with increase of center-of-mass energy, and from Cu-Cu, Au-Au, Pb-Pb, and p-pb collisions, the three quantities increase with increase of centrality. To see clearly the dependences of, p, and T on and m, we fit the linear relationships which can be written as and = C 0 +k T, (7) p = C p +k p, (8) T = T 0 +k, (9) = C 0 + u T m, (0) p = C p + u m, () T = C T +k m, () respectively, where the units of temperature, momentum, velocity, and mass are GeV, GeV/c, c, and GeV/c, respectively, where c = is in natural units; The intercepts (C 0, C p, T 0, C 0, C p and C T ) have the same units as corresponding dependent variables; The slopes k T, k p, u T, and u are in the units of c, while k and k are in the units of c. The values of intercepts, slopes, and χ are given in Table 4. From Figures 6 and Table 4, we can see the intercepts and slopes in different linear correlations. In all cases, the intercepts with different center-of-mass energies (p-p collision) or centrality bins (Cu-Cu, Au-Au, Pb-Pb, or p-pb collisions) have the tendency of converging to one point, which means the intercepts are nearly equal to each other or do not change obviously with center-of-mass energy or centrality, while the slopes have the tendencies of increasing with center-of-mass energy and centrality. The intercepts and slopes obtained from, p, and T correlations are larger than those from m, p m, and T m correlations, but the changes about intercepts are much larger than those about slopes. Besides, the increments of slopes with center-ofmass energy or centrality in, p, and T correlations are larger than those in m, p m, and T m correlations, which renders slow changes in the latter cases. In function T = T 0 + k, the quantity T extracted directly from the distribution mentioned above, is the effective temperature which includes thermal motion and flow effect of particles. As the temperature corresponding to massless ( = 0) particle, T 0 is regarded as the source real temperature at the kinetic freeze-out (or the kinetic freezeout temperature of interacting system) [39 43]. The flow effect of particles is shown in quantity of k, where the slope k has the dimension of the square of velocity. At the 7
same time, in function T = C T m, although the intercept C +k T has the same dimension as temperature, it s values shown in Figure and Table 4 approximately equal to zero, which have no physics meaning. Incorrelations, m, p, and p m, the slopes (k T, u T, k p, and u ) have the dimension of velocity and are considered to be related to mean transverse flow velocity and mean flow velocity. It is interesting to find the relationships between the intercepts and slopes, especially relationships between the several flow velocities and k (or k ). Figure exhibits the correlations between intercepts (a) C p C 0, (b) C p C 0, and T 0 C 0 in different collision systems with different centrality classes at different energies, and corresponding fitting are executed. One can see that C p and C 0, C p and C 0 have explicit linear relations C p = (π/)c 0 and C p = (π/)c 0 with almost zero χ, which is duetotheassumptionofisotropicemissioninthesourcerest frame. InT 0 C 0 correlation, the T 0 increases with increase of C 0, and they are basically compatible with the linear relation T 0 = (0.9 ±0.073)C 0 with χ /dof = 0.37. Other relations among intercepts do not show an obvious law and are not shown in the panels due to trivialness. At the same time, the correlations between different slopes (a) k p k T, (b) k k T, k T u T, (d) u u T, and (e) k u T in different collision systems with different centrality classes at different energies, as well as corresponding fitting are shown in Figure 3. Once again, based on the assumption of isotropic emission in the source rest frame, the k p and k T from p and, u and u T from p m and m also have the same explicit linear relations k p = (π/)k T and u = (π/) u T with almost zero χ. From Figures 3(b) and 3(d), one can see that k (or k ) increases with increase of k T (or u T ), and the parameters are in good agreement with the fitted power function relations k = [(/3)±0.08]kT with χ /dof =.546 and k = [(/)±0.70] u T with χ /dof =.47, respectively. The relationship between k T and u T respectively from and m correlations is fitted by the line k T = (3.0±0.84) u T (0.74±0.08) with χ /dof = 0.043. Other relations among slopes do not show an obvious law and are not shown in the panels due to trivialness. In addition, we would like to point out that in the Monte Carlo calculation, some conservation laws (such as energy conservation and momentum conservation) and physics limitation (such as flow velocity < c) are used so that we can obtain reasonable values and relations. It is noticed that most of u T values (0.339 c) extracted from m are slightly less than c and k T (0.38 0.944c) from, while most of u values (3 0.80c) extracted from p m is more close to c and less than k p (46.44c) from. Considering overlarge k T and k p, we regard u T and u as the mean transverse flow velocity and mean flow velocity of particles respectively, and they obey the relation of u = (π/) u T. In addition, u T and k approximatively obey k = (/) u T. The mean T 0 of interacting system obtained from T does dot change in error range or approximates independent of energy, centrality, particle type, and system size. The mean T 0 corresponding to the Tsallis distribution is (0.07 ± 0.007) GeV, which is less than that [(0.37 ± 0.007)] GeV from the Boltzmann distribution in previous work [43], and is also less than that (0.77 GeV) from an exponential shape of transverse mass spectrum [4]. Our result is close to that (0.098 GeV) from the blast-wave model [44]. Comparing with chemical freeze-out temperature, the kinetic freeze-out temperature in 8
present work is obviously less than that (0.70 GeV) of theoretical critical point of the QCD (quantum chromodynamics) prediction [45 47], and that (6 GeV) from particle ratios in a thermal and statistical model [3]. In the above discussions, we present in fact a method to extract the kinetic freezeout temperature and (transverse) flow velocity from transverse momentum spectra in the multisource thermal model [8 0], in which the sources are described by different distribution laws. The method to extract the kinetic freeze-out temperature is also used in other literature [39 43], and the method to extract the (transverse) flow velocity is seldom discussed elsewhere. Although the method used in the present work is different from the blast-wave model [] which discusses radial flow, it offers anyhow another way to study the kinetic freeze-out temperature and (transverse) flow velocity. In our recent work [48], the multisource thermal model is revised with the blast-wave picture, where we assume that the fragments and particles produced by thermal reason in the sources are pushed away by a blast-wave. The blast-wave causes the final-state products to be effected by isotropic and anisotropic flows. 4 Conclusions From the above discussions, we obtain following conclusions. (a) The transverse momentum distributions of final-state particles produced in p-p, Cu-Cu, Au-Au, Pb-Pb, and p-pb collisions with different centrality bins over an energy range fro. to 7 TeV, can be described by one-, two-, or three-component Erlang distribution and Tsallis statistics in the framework of multisource thermal model. The calculated results are consistent with the experimental data of π ±, K ±, K 0 S, p, p, φ, Λ, Λ, Ξ, and Ω, etc. measured by the STAR, CMS, and ALICE Collaborations. (b) In most cases, the data of spectra are fitted by the two-component Erlang distribution, where the first component corresponding to a narrow low- region is contributed by the soft excitation process in which a few sea quarks and gluons taken part in and accounts for a larger proportion, and the second component for a wide high- region indicates hard scattering process which is a more violent collision among a few valent quarks in incident nucleons. The mean transverse momentum extracted from multi-component Erlang distribution increases with increases of center-of-mass energy, particle mass, event centrality, and system size. TheTsallis distributionusestwofreeparameterst andq todescribetheeffective temperature and the non-equilibrium degree of the interacting system respectively. The present work shows that q decreases with increases of particle mass and event centrality, and increases with increase of center-of-mass energy. In physics, q = corresponds to an equilibrium state and a large q corresponds to a state departing far from equilibrium. Our study indicates that a high center-of-mass energy results in interacting system deviating from the equilibrium state, and the interacting system of central collisions and heavier particles are closer to the equilibrium state. The extracted T increases with increases of center-of-mass energy, particle mass, event centrality, and system size. (d) The intercept T 0 in T correlation is regarded as the mean kinetic freezeout temperature of interacting system, which do not depend on center-of-mass energy, 9
event centrality, and system size in error range, which renders that different interacting systems at the stage of kinetic freeze-out stay at the same phase state. The average of T 0 corresponding to the Tsallis distribution is (0.07±0.007) GeV, which is less than the effective temperature, chemical freeze-out temperature, and expected critical temperature (30 65 MeV) of the QGP formation [49]. (e) The mean transverse flow velocity u T and mean flow velocity u of particles are obtained from m and p m correlations respectively. The present work shows that u T (0.339-c) and u (3-0.80c) have narrower range and are more close to c than those from and p, respectively. On the assumption of isotropic emission in the source rest frame, there is u = (π/) u T. Besides, u T and k from corresponding T m correlation approximatively meet k = (/) u T, which means u T and u can be obtained from correlation T m based on k = (/) u T and u = (π/) u T relationships. In addition, the mean transverse flow velocity and mean flow velocity have a slightly increase tendency with center-of-mass energy, event centrality, and system size. Conflict of Interests The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper. Acknowledgments This work was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No. 57503 and the US DOE under contract DE-FG0-87ER4033.A008. References [] D.H. Rischke, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 5, 97 (004). [] E. Schnedermann, J. Sollfrank, U.W. Heinz, Phys. Rev. C, 48, 46 (993). [3] J. Stachel, A. Andronic, P. Braun-Munzinger, K. Redlich, J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 509, 009 (04). [4] L.D. Landau, Izvestiya akademii nauk: series fizicheskikh 7, 5 (953), in English- Translation: Collected Papers of L. D. Landau, D. Ter-Haarp, Ed., p. 569, Pergamon, Oxford, UK, 965. [5] I.M. Khalatnikov, Journal of Experimental and Theoretical Physics, 7, 59 54 (954) (in Russian). [6] P.A. Steinberg, Nucl. Phys. A, 75, 43 (005). [7] L.-N. Gao, F.-H. Liu, Adv. High Energy Phys. 05, 64906 (05). 0
[8] F.-H. Liu, Nucl. Phys. A 80, 59 (008). [9] F.-H. Liu, J.-S. Li, Phys. Rev. C 78, 04460 (008). [0] F.-H. Liu, Y.-Q. Gao, T. Tian, B.-C. Li, Eur. Phys. J. A 50, 94 (04). [] F.-H. Liu, H.-R. Wei, R. A. Lacey, Eur. Phys. J. A, 5, 43 (05). [] L.-N. Gao, F.-H. Liu, Adv. High Energy Phys. 05, 8473 (05). [3] H.-R. Wei, Y.-H Chen, L.-N. Gao, F.-H. Liu, Adv. High Energy Phys. 04, 7863 (04). [4] H. Zhao, F.-H. Liu, Adv. High Energy Phys. 04, 37058 (04). [5] STAR Collaboration (B.I. Abelev et al.), Phys. Rev. C 79, 034909 (009). [6] STAR Collaboration (G. Agakishiev et al.), Phys. Rev. Lett. 08, 0730 (0). [7] STAR Collaboration (B.I. Abelev et al.), Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 530 (006). [8] STAR Collaboration (B.I. Abelev et al.), Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 30 (007). [9] STAR Collaboration (J. Adams et al.), Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 0630 (007). [0] CMS Collaboration (S. Chatrchyan et al.), Eur. Phys. J. C 7, 64 (0). [] ALICE Collaboration (K. Aamodt et al.), Eur. Phys. J. C 7, 594 (0). [] ALICE Collaboration (M. Floris et al.), J. Phys. G 38, 405 (00). [3] ALICE Collaboration (B. Abelev et al.), Phys. Rev. C 88, 04490 (03). [4] ALICE Collaboration (B. Abelev et al.), Phys. Rev C 9, 04609 (05). [5] ALICE Collaboration (B. Abelev et al.), Phys. Lett. B 78, 5 (04). [6] C. Tsallis, J. Stat. Phys. 5, 479 (988). [7] C. Tsallis, Braz. J. Phys. 39, 337 (009). [8] W.M. Alberico, A. Lavagno, Eur. Phys. J. A 40, 33 (009). [9] G. Wilk, Z. W lodarczyk, Phys. Rev. C 79, 054903 (009). [30] G. Wilk, Z. W lodarczyk, in Proceeding of the 6th International Workshop on Relativistic Aspects of Nuclear Physics (RANP000), São Paulo, Brazil, October 7-0, 000, edited by T. Kodama, C.E. Aguiar, H.-T. Elze, F. Grassi, Y. Hama, G. Krein (World Sciencetific, Singapore, 00) pp. 78 96, arxiv:hep-ph/0089v. [3] W.M. Alberico, P. Czerski, A. Lavagno, M. Nardi, V. Somá, arxiv:hep-ph/0507v.
[3] B.-C. Li, Y.-Z. Wang, F.-H. Liu, Phys. Lett. B 75, 35 (03). [33] T.S. Biró, Eur. Phys. J. A 40, 55 (009). [34] T.S. Biró, Physica A 39, 33 (03). [35] T.S. Biró, G. Purcsel, K. Urmossy, Eur. Phys. J. A 40, 35 (009). [36] J. Cleymans, D. Worku, Eur. Phys. J. A 48, 60 (0). [37] K. Urmossy, G.G. Barnaföldi, Sz Harangozó, T.S. Biró, Z. Xu, arxiv:50.035. [38] K. Urmossy, T.S. Biró, G.G. Barnaföldi, Z. Xu, arxiv:50.05959. [39] U.W. Heinz, Concepts of heavy-ion physics, Lecture Notes for Lectures Presented at the nd CERN Latin-American School of High-Energy Physics, San Miguel Regla, Mexico, June -4, 003, arxiv:hep-ph/0407360. [40] PHENIX Collaboration (S.S. Adler et al.), Phys. Rev. C 69, 034909 (004). [4] S. Takeuchi, K. Murase, T. Hirano, P. Huovinen, Y. Nara, Phys. Rev. C 9, 044907 (05). [4] R. Russo, Measurement of D + meson production in p-pb collisions with the ALICE detector, Ph.D. thesis, Universitaâ degli Studi di Torino, Italy, 05, arxiv:5.04380. [43] H.-R. Wei, F.-H. Liu, R. A. Lacey, arxiv: 509.09083. [44] ALICE Collaboration (J. Adam et al.), arxiv:506.0895. [45] Z. Fodor, S.D. Katz, JHEP 0404, 050 (004). [46] S. Datta, R.V. Gavai, S. Gupta, Nucl. Phys. A 904-905, 883c (03). [47] N. Xu for the STAR Collaboration, Nucl. Phys. A 93, (04). [48] F-H Liu, H-L Lao, Indian. J. Phys. 90, accepted (06). [49] M. Floris, Nucl. Phys. A 93, 03 (04).
Table. Values of free parameters, normalization constant, and χ /dof corresponding to one- or two-component Erlang distribution in Figures 5 except Figure 3(a). The value of χ /dof for Ξ + Ξ + in Figure is in fact the value of χ due to less data points. Figure Type m p ti (GeV/c ) k m p ti (GeV/c ) N E0 χ /dof Figure (a) π + 0.75 ± 0.00 - -.4 ± 0.64 0.03 K + p 0.80 ± 0.030 0.330 ± 0.030 - - - - 0.093 ± 0.04 0.07 ± 0.00 0.009 0.07 Figure (b) π + 3 0.095 ± 0.00 5 ± 0.050 0.7 ± 0.05.840 ± 0.00 0.08 K + 3 9 ± 0.00 0.670 ± 0.050 4 0.56 ± 0.050 0.30 ± 0.030 0.074 p 4 0 ± 0.00 50 ± 0.050 4 0.78 ± 0.00 0.0 ± 0.00 0.06 Figure Λ 0.405 ± 0.00 - - 0.054 ± 0.03 0.30 φ 0.458 ± 0.00 - - 0.00 ± 0.0 0.6 Ξ + Ξ + 0.40 ± 0.030 - - 0.007 ± 0.030 (0.8) Figure (d) π + 3 0.096 ± 0.00 0 ± 0.050 0.300 ± 0.00.30 ± 0.00 0.05 K + p 3 3 0.6 ± 0.00 0.45 ± 0.00 0.60 ± 0.050 0.790 ± 0.070 4 4 0.50 ± 0.030 0.355 ± 0.080 0.94 ± 0.00 0.3 ± 0.00 0.05 0.057 Figure (e) π + 3 0.096 ± 0.00 5 ± 0.060 0.30 ± 0.030.850 ± 0.300 0.099 K + 3 0.67 ± 0.00 0.60 ± 0.080 4 0.60 ± 0.030 0.360 ± 0.030 0.05 p 3 0.4 ± 0.00 0.670 ± 0.070 4 0.357 ± 0.070 0.68 ± 0.05 0.07 Figure (f) Ξ 3 0.400 ± 0.040 0.870 ± 0.050 0.90 ± 0.060 (.30 ± 00) 0 3 0.056 Ω 0.650 ± 0.040 0.980 ± 0.00.00 ± 0.050 (.480 ± 0.600) 0 4 0.064 Figure (a) 0-0% 0.30 ± 0.030 0.953 ± 0.00 0.760 ± 0.040 6.46 ±.734 0.30 0-30% 0.30 ± 0.040 0.940 ± 0.030 0.740 ± 0.040 3.0 ±.369 0.4 0.300 ± 0.040 0.90 ± 0.030 0.730 ± 0.050.067 ± 0.4 0.368 Figure (b) 0-0% 4 0.75 ± 0.00 0.988 ± 0.008 3 30 ± 0.040 0.8 ± 0.363 0.96 0-30% 4 0.60 ± 0.00 0.97 ± 0.05 3 00 ± 0.040 0.446 ± 0.66 0.088 4 0.47 ± 0.00 0.957 ± 0.00 3 0.485 ± 0.040 4 ± 0.067 0.33 Figure 0-0% 3 0.360 ± 0.030 - - 0.3 ± 0.055 0.655 0-30% 3 0.370 ± 0.030 - - 0.05 ± 0.00.353 3 0.363 ± 0.030 - - 0.05 ± 0.008 0.708 Figure (d) 0-0% 4 0.36 ± 0.00 - - 0.08 ± 0.006 0.49 0-30% 3 0.393 ± 0.05 - - 0.04 ± 0.005 0.39 3 0.400 ± 0.030 - - 0.003 ± 0.00 0. Figure 3(b) 0.330 ± 0.030 0.98 ± 0.006 0.840 ± 0.050 8.680 ± 5.89 0.034 0-0% 0.337 ± 0.030 0.960 ± 0.00 0.780 ± 0.050 0.605 ±.555 0.08 0-40% 0.330 ± 0.030 0.950 ± 0.00 0.760 ± 0.040 6.766 ±.08 0.05 0.36 ± 0.030 0.957 ± 0.00 0.80 ± 0.050.63 ±.049 0.056 60-80% 0.30 ± 0.030 0.900 ± 0.030 0.70 ± 0.050 0.879 ± 0.74 0.04 Figure 3 0-% 4 0.70 ± 0.00 0.986 ± 0.005.030 ± 0.050 5.06 ±.50 0.54 0-0% 4 0.60 ± 0.00 0.90 ± 0.00 0.80 ± 0.050 4.06 ±.39 0.36 0-40% 4 0.55 ± 0.030 0.90 ± 0.040 0.800 ± 0.050.408 ± 0.99 0.88 4 0.37 ± 0.030 0.870 ± 0.040 0.750 ± 0.050.99 ± 0.475 0.95 60-80% 4 0.0 ± 0.030 0.800 ± 0.050 0.680 ± 0.050 0.48 ± 0.04 0.7 Figure 3(d) 3 0.340 ± 0.00 - -.76 ± 87 0.09 0-0% 3 0.355 ± 0.00 - -.055 ± 0.35 0.03 30-40% 3 0.355 ± 0.00 - - 0.478 ± 4 0.06 50-60% 0.445 ± 0.035 - - 0.76 ± 0.085 0.07 70-80% 0.45 ± 0.040 - - 0.068 ± 0.03 0.0 Figure 3(e) 4 0.86 ± 0.05 0.998 ± 0.00 3 0.640 ± 0.040.970 ±.65 0.035 0-0% 4 0.86 ± 0.05 0.996 ± 0.00 3 90 ± 0.040.839 ± 8 0.049 0-40% 4 0.8 ± 0.00 0.99 ± 0.004 3 90 ± 0.040.077 ± 0.44 0.069 4 0.70 ± 0.00 0.977 ± 0.00 3 30 ± 0.040 0.466 ± 9 0.009 60-80% 4 0.50 ± 0.05 0.950 ± 0.00 3 0.470 ± 0.040 0.45 ± 0.053 0.059 Figure 3(f) 4 0.34 ± 0.00 - - 0.70 ± 0.090 0.008 0-0% 4 0.34 ± 0.00 - - 0.90 ± 0.064 0.044 0-40% 4 0.35 ± 0.00 - - 0.098 ± 0.030 0.05 4 0.309 ± 0.030 - - 0.038 ± 0.03 0.36 60-80% 4 0.35 ± 0.040 - - 0.008 ± 0.003 0.40 Figure 4(a) 0.34 ± 0.00 80 ± 0.080 30 ± 0.030 5.68 ± 3.936 0.058 50-60% 0.94 ± 0.030 0 ± 0.00 30 ± 0.030 54.364 ± 3.59 0.038 80-90% 0.70 ± 0.030 50 ± 0.050 05 ± 0.035 5.474 ±.466 0.037 Figure 4(b) 3 0.80 ± 0.030 0.850 ± 0.050 0.600 ± 0.050 30.686 ± 8.768 0.05 50-60% 3 0.0 ± 0.040 50 ± 0.050 0.480 ± 0.050 3.45 ±.067 0.0 80-90% 3 0.90 ± 0.050 50 ± 0.050 0.460 ± 0.050 0.307 ± 0.095 0.054 Figure 4 3 0.430 ± 0.030 - - 5.865 ±.09 0.75 50-60% 3 0.370 ± 0.030 0.950 ± 0.030 3 0.600 ± 0.070 0.74 ± 0.65 0.04 80-90% 3 0.85 ± 0.040 0.900 ± 0.050 3 0 ± 0.080 0.094 ± 0.033 0.053 Figure 4(d) 3 0.460 ± 0.030 - -.499 ± 3.000 0.89 50-60% 80 ± 0.040 - -.569 ± 00 0.7 80-90% 70 ± 0.040 - - 0.05 ± 0.035 0.344 Figure 5(a) 0.75 ± 0.040 0.680 ± 0.050 0.460 ± 0.030 8.09 ± 8.03 0.76 0.65 ± 0.040 0.70 ± 0.050 0.440 ± 0.030 0.766 ± 3.04 0.083 80-00% 0.75 ± 0.040 0.830 ± 0.050 0.440 ± 0.030 3.4 ± 0.89 0.094 Figure 5(b) 3 0.35 ± 0.030 0 ± 0.00 0.600 ± 0.050.738 ± 0.80 0.00 3 0.0 ± 0.030 50 ± 0.00 50 ± 0.050 0.67 ± 0.04 0.03 80-00% 3 0.65 ± 0.030 0 ± 0.00 0.440 ± 0.040 0.8 ± 0.039 0.0 Figure 5 3 0.400 ± 0.030 60 ± 0.00 0.650 ± 0.050 0.450 ± 0.08 0.036 3 0.85 ± 0.040 0.680 ± 0.00 3 0 ± 0.030 0.03 ± 0.045 0.0 80-00% 3 0.37 ± 0.030 0.80 ± 0.050 3 0.465 ± 0.030 0.069 ± 0.05 0.0 Figure 5(d) 4 0.345 ± 0.040 0.70 ± 0.070 0.80 ± 0.040 0.56 ± 0.05 0.06 4 0.85 ± 0.040 0.740 ± 0.060 0.780 ± 0.040 0.03 ± 0.04 0.08 80-00% 3 0.33 ± 0.040 0.880 ± 0.040 0.780 ± 0.040 0.03 ± 0.009 0.074 3
Table. Values of free parameters, normalization constants, and χ /dof corresponding to Tsallis distribution in Figures 5. The value of χ /dof for Ξ + Ξ + in Figure is the value of χ due to less data points. Figure Type T (GeV) q N T0 χ /dof Figure (a) π + 0.088 ± 0.00.095 ± 0.00.048 ± 0.3 0.08 K + p 0.05 ± 0.003 0.35 ± 0.003.074 ± 0.00.045 ± 0.008 0.08 ± 0.0 0.05 ± 0.006 0.037 0.085 Figure (b) π + 0.09 ± 0.003.7 ± 0.007.85 ± 0.308 0.077 K + p 0. ± 0.004 9 ± 0.004.07 ± 0.007.069 ± 0.007 0.9 ± 0.09 0.03 ± 0.05 0.07 0.084 Figure Λ 0.75 ± 0.003.064 ± 0.00 0.045 ± 0.005.9 φ 0.74 ± 0.003.09 ± 0.00 0.08 ± 0.00 0.804 Ξ + Ξ + 0.80 ± 0.003.060 ± 0.004 0.0 ± 0.00 (0.348) Figure (d) π + 0.09 ± 0.003.40 ± 0.007.305 ± 0.360 0.3 K + 0.3 ± 0.003. ± 0.008 0.30 ± 0.040 0.04 p 9 ± 0.003.08 ± 0.007 0.34 ± 0.0 0.08 Figure (e) π + 0.090 ± 0.003.50 ± 0.005.90 ± 0.39 0.43 K + p 0.7 ± 0.003 0.63 ± 0.003.4 ± 0.005.098 ± 0.005 0.376 ± 0.036 0.68 ± 0.06 0.0 0.04 Figure (f) Ξ 0.88 ± 0.003.099 ± 0.00 (.389 ± 0.34) 0 3 83 Ω 0.5 ± 0.003.096 ± 0.003 (.80 ± 0.3) 0 4 0.037 Figure (a) 0-0% 0.3 ± 0.007.085 ± 0.004 7.55 ±.600 0.4 0-30% 0.8 ± 0.007.087 ± 0.004 3.504 ±.460 0.90 0.5 ± 0.007.09 ± 0.004.48 ± 46 0.95 Figure (b) 0-0% 0.7 ± 0.007.034 ± 0.004.60 ± 0.733 0.789 0-30% 0.98 ± 0.007.045 ± 0.004 0.80 ± 0.80 0.75 0.7 ± 0.006.055 ± 0.004 0.70 ± 0.04 0.33 Figure 0-0% 0.43 ± 0.006.033 ± 0.003 0.67 ± 0.048 0.67 0-30% 0.8 ± 0.006.04 ± 0.004 0.065 ± 0.03 0.379 0.0 ± 0.006.043 ± 0.003 0.0 ± 0.008 0.343 Figure (d) 0-0% 0.306 ± 0.007.09 ± 0.005 0.03 ± 0.009 0.858 0-30% 0.33 ± 0.007.044 ± 0.004 0.06 ± 0.004 0.089 0.3 ± 0.007.048 ± 0.004 0.003 ± 0.00 0.080 Figure 3(a) 0-% 0. ± 0.006.095 ± 0.005 68.987 ± 77.994 0-0% 0.0 ± 0.005.097 ± 0.005 37.54 ± 75.03 0.4 0-40% 0.09 ± 0.006.00 ± 0.005 73.740 ± 36.870 0.058 0.06 ± 0.006.03 ± 0.004 30.07 ± 6.93 0.08 60-80% 0.03 ± 0.006.05 ± 0.005 9.980 ± 5.40 0.084 Figure 3(b) 0.66 ± 0.006.069 ± 0.005 8.4 ± 6.977 0.4 0-0% 0.63 ± 0.006.073 ± 0.005.95 ± 4.65 0.056 0-40% 0.6 ± 0.006.074 ± 0.005 6.57 ±.6 0.03 9 ± 0.006.078 ± 0.005.607 ±.7 0.049 60-80% 7 ± 0.007.078 ± 0.005 0.77 ± 0.33 0.046 Figure 3 0-% 0.5 ± 0.007.055 ± 0.005 7.33 ± 3.945.785 0-0% 0.0 ± 0.00.054 ± 0.006 5.883 ±.94 0.44 0-40% 0.03 ± 0.00.055 ± 0.005 3.389 ±.694 6 0.85 ± 0.00.06 ± 0.005.45 ± 8 0.96 60-80% 0.60 ± 0.00.07 ± 0.005 0.466 ± 0.50 0.83 Figure 3(d) 0.55 ± 0.05.033 ± 0.00.07 ± 0.89 0.04 0-0% 0.53 ± 0.03.037 ± 0.0.38 ± 0.64 0.066 30-40% 0.50 ± 0.05.038 ± 0.00 0.63 ± 0.45 0.079 50-60% 0. ± 0.0.055 ± 0.00 0. ± 0.09 0.06 70-80% 0.03 ± 0.05.05 ± 0.00 0.054 ± 0.04 0.05 Figure 3(e) 0.88 ± 0.05.08 ± 0.005 4.465 ±.436 0.378 0-0% 0.78 ± 0.03.0 ± 0.006.574 ±.065 0.6 0-40% 0.73 ± 0.0.07 ± 0.007.436 ± 0.676 0.370 0.60 ± 0.0.030 ± 0.006 0.60 ± 0.75 0.6 60-80% 0.50 ± 0.03.030 ± 0.006 0.04 ± 0.0 0.98 Figure 3(f) 0.365 ± 0.05.00 ± 0.00 0.45 ± 0.83 0.06 0-0% 0.35 ± 0.05.00 ± 0.00 0.30 ± 0.3 0.059 0-40% 0.345 ± 0.05.00 ± 0.00 0.7 ± 0.068 0.034 0.33 ± 0.05.00 ± 0.00 0.068 ± 0.034 0.40 60-80% 0.38 ± 0.05.0 ± 0.00 0.05 ± 0.006 0.48 Figure 4(a) 0. ± 0.00.6 ± 0.005 430.964 ±.590 0. 50-60% 0.09 ± 0.00.47 ± 0.005 48.74 ± 0.84 0.6 80-90% 0.07 ± 0.00.63 ± 0.005 5.83 ± 0.95 0.4 Figure 4(b) 0.58 ± 0.005.038 ± 0.005 34.75 ± 5. 0.009 50-60% 0.60 ± 0.004.07 ± 0.005 3.8 ± 0.637 0.09 80-90% 0.5 ± 0.004.3 ± 0.005 0.346 ± 0.077 0.048 Figure 4 0.380 ± 0.00.03 ± 0.00 7.346 ±.90 0.36 50-60% 0.305 ± 0.006.037 ± 0.005 0.874 ± 0.04 0.04 80-90% 0.00 ± 0.005.064 ± 0.005 0.04 ± 0.05 0.04 Figure 4(d) 0.379 ± 0.007.06 ± 0.005 3.487 ±.80 0.3 50-60% 0.350 ± 0.007.040 ± 0.007.400 ± 0.6 0.30 80-90% 0.56 ± 0.007.075 ± 0.007 0.096 ± 0.0 0.8 Figure 5(a) 0.099 ± 0.003.63 ± 0.005 3.93 ± 5.400 0.37 0.088 ± 0.003.63 ± 0.006 0.008 ±.045 0.304 80-00% 0.07 ± 0.003.64 ± 0.006 3.338 ± 0.747 0.04 Figure 5(b) 0.77 ± 0.003.9 ± 0.005.95 ± 0.3 0.007 0.44 ± 0.003.35 ± 0.005 0.750 ± 0.094 0.00 80-00% 0.090 ± 0.00.5 ± 0.005 0.35 ± 0.033 0.03 Figure 5 0.95 ± 0.009.068 ± 0.008 5 ± 0.4 0.0 0.84 ± 0.006.00 ± 0.007 0.37 ± 0.057 0.03 80-00% 0.09 ± 0.004.0 ± 0.005 0.079 ± 0.0 0.08 Figure 5(d) 0.30 ± 0.005.07 ± 0.004 0.348 ± 0.083 0.05 0.96 ± 0.005.098 ± 0.004 0.44 ± 0.03 0.08 80-00% 0.00 ± 0.003.9 ± 0.003 0.040 ± 0.03 0.06 Table 3. Values of free parameters, normalization constant, and χ /dof corresponding to the three-component Erlang distribution in Figure 3(a), where m = m = m 3 = which are not listed in the column. Figure Type p ti (GeV/c ) k p ti (GeV/c ) k p ti3 (GeV/c ) N E0 χ /dof Figure 3(a) 0-% 0.0 ± 0.040 0.9097 ± 0.03640 0.400 ± 0.040 0.08997 ± 0.00360.040 ± 0.050 3.650 ± 6.36 0.043 0-0% 0. ± 0.040 0.90964 ± 0.03640 0.400 ± 0.040 0.08996 ± 0.0036.050 ± 0.080 93.34 ± 34.53 0.9 0-40% 0.5 ± 0.040 0.87930 ± 0.04400 0.390 ± 0.040 0.990 ± 0.00600 0.960 ± 0.060 5.39 ± 4.378 0.086 0. ± 0.040 0.90936 ± 0.04550 0.45 ± 0.040 0.08994 ± 0.0045.000 ± 0.070 4.36 ± 7.099 0.080 60-80% 0.00 ± 0.040 0.90936 ± 0.03640 0.40 ± 0.040 0.08994 ± 0.0036.00 ± 0.080 8.8 ± 3.695 0.83 4
Table 4. Values of intercepts, slopes, and χ corresponding to the lines in Figures 6. Figure Correlation Type Intercept Slope χ Figure 6(a) p-p 0. TeV 0.3 ± 0.064 0.386 ± 0.04 0.75 p-p 0.9 TeV 0.45 ± 0.08 0.38 ± 0.087.00 p-p.76 TeV 0.377 ± 0.04 54 ± 0.067 0.050 p-p 7 TeV 0.398 ± 0.064 97 ± 0.060 0.87 Figure 6(b) 0-0% 0.95 ± 0.6 0.669 ± 0.0 4 0-30% 0.433 ± 0.0 0.486 ± 0.098 0.84 0.386 ± 0.078 3 ± 0.064 0.077 Figure 6 0-% 0.353 ± 0.047 0.708 ± 0.050 0.60 0-0% 0.367 ± 0.00 0.684 ± 0.0 0.036 0-40% 0.358 ± 0.00 0.686 ± 0.0 0.043 0.347 ± 0.059 0.63 ± 0.064 0.09 60-80% 0.96 ± 0.05 0.647 ± 0.4 4 Figure 6(d) 0.37 ± 0.07 0.994 ± 0.036 0.037 50-60% 0.36 ± 0.040 0.85 ± 0.054 0.057 80-90% 0.35 ± 0.084 0.738 ± 0.4 0.355 Figure 6(e) 0.436 ± 0.054 0.906 ± 0.070 0.088 0.47 ± 0.054 0.740 ± 0.070 0.093 80-00% 0.376 ± 0.049 46 ± 0.063 0.07 Figure 7(a) p p-p 0. TeV 06 ± 0.00 0.606 ± 0.63 0.336 p-p 0.9 TeV 0.666 ± 0.7 0.600 ± 0.37.76 p-p.76 TeV 9 ± 0.065 0.870 ± 0.05 0.09 p-p 7 TeV 0.66 ± 0.0 0.937 ± 0.095 0.40 Figure 7(b) 0-0% 0.463 ± 0.97.05 ± 0.6 0.369 0-30% 0.680 ± 0.89 0.763 ± 4 0.430 0.606 ± 0.3 0.806 ± 0.00 0.8 Figure 7 0-% 54 ± 0.074. ± 0.079 0.37 0-0% 76 ± 0.03.075 ± 0.034 0.07 0-40% 6 ± 0.03.077 ± 0.033 0.08 45 ± 0.093 0.993 ± 0.00 0.48 60-80% 0.465 ± 0.65.06 ± 0.78.8 Figure 7(d) 85 ± 0.04.56 ± 0.057 0.06 50-60% 69 ± 0.063.79 ± 0.086 0.04 80-90% 0 ± 0.3.59 ± 0.80 0.300 Figure 7(e) 0.685 ± 0.086.44 ± 0. 5 0.655 ± 0.085.6 ± 0.0 0.68 80-00% 90 ± 0.076 0.858 ± 0.099 5 Figure 8(a) T p-p 0. TeV 0.078 ± 0.004 0.060 ± 0.006 0.038 p-p 0.9 TeV 0.083 ± 0.006 0.080 ± 0.007 0.38 p-p.76 TeV 0.080 ± 0.00 0.080 ± 0.00 0.046 p-p 7 TeV 0.084 ± 0.004 0.080 ± 0.004 0.86 Figure 8(b) 0-0% 0.059 ± 0.0 0.45 ± 0.009 0.073 0-30% 0.087 ± 0.0 0.095 ± 0.08 0.34 0.08 ± 0.06 0.087 ± 0.03 0.93 Figure 8 0-% 0.068 ± 0.06 0.97 ± 0.08.545 0-0% 0.069 ± 0.04 0.90 ± 0.06.04 0-40% 0.069 ± 0.05 0.84 ± 0.07.74 0.068 ± 0.030 0.70 ± 0.03.64 60-80% 0.064 ± 0.039 0.6 ± 0.04.843 Figure 8(d) 0.083 ± 0.05 0.308 ± 0.034.696 50-60% 0.036 ± 0.0 0.94 ± 0.09.9 80-90% 0.037 ± 0.0 0.95 ± 0.09.057 Figure 8(e) 0.070 ± 0.03 0.0 ± 0.08 0.39 0.083 ± 0.009 0.09 ± 0.0 58 80-00% 0.074 ± 0.005 0.03 ± 0.007 0.96 Figure 9(a) m p-p 0. TeV 0.67 ± 0.056 0.339 ± 0.063 0.06 p-p 0.9 TeV 0.07 ± 0.046 0.346 ± 0.075 0.34 p-p.76 TeV 0.48 ± 0.08 0.48 ± 0.038 0.05 p-p 7 TeV 0.60 ± 0.03 0.4 ± 0.047 0.06 Figure 9(b) 0-0% 0.097 ± 0.03 0.45 ± 0.07 0.035 0-30% 0.99 ± 0.044 0.385 ± 0.094 0.060 0.78 ± 0.030 0.39 ± 0.06 0.08 Figure 9 0-% 0.05 ± 0.03 0.468 ± 0.06 0.05 0-0% 0.6 ± 0.006 0.460 ± 0.0 0.005 0-40% 0.3 ± 0.005 0.46 ± 0.009 0.005 0. ± 0.0 0.448 ± 0.039 0.054 60-80% 0.076 ± 0.034 0.459 ± 0.059 0.9 Figure 9(d) 0.08 ± 0.007 ± 0.04 0.005 50-60% 0.0 ± 0.06 0.486 ± 0.09 0.03 80-90% 0.097 ± 0.04 0.470 ± 0.038 0.06 Figure 9(e) 0.0 ± 0.0 0 ± 0.04 0.008 0. ± 0.07 0.475 ± 0.030 0.0 80-00% 0.47 ± 0.0 0.44 ± 0.034 0.07 Figure 0(a) p m p-p 0. TeV 0.6 ± 0.099 3 ± 0.089 0. p-p 0.9 TeV 0.36 ± 0.8 44 ± 0.07 0.75 p-p.76 TeV 0.3 ± 0.059 0.657 ± 0.045 0.08 p-p 7 TeV 0.5 ± 0.074 0.66 ± 0.037 0.3 Figure 0(b) 0-0% ± 0. 0.708 ± 0.050 0.084 0-30% 0.3 ± 0.48 0.605 ± 0.070 0.45 0.80 ± 0.098 0.65 ± 0.046 0.066 Figure 0 0-% 0.65 ± 0.040 0.736 ± 0.0 0.05 0-0% 0.83 ± 0.08 0.74 ± 0.00 0.0 0-40% 0.78 ± 0.05 0.74 ± 0.008 0.009 0.75 ± 0.06 0.703 ± 0.034 0.6 60-80% 0.0 ± 0.093 0.7 ± 0.053 0.83 Figure 0(d) 0.7 ± 0.0 0.80 ± 0.0 0.009 50-60% 0.60 ± 0.045 0.763 ± 0.06 0.05 80-90% ± 0.060 0.738 ± 0.037 0.034 Figure 0(e) 8 ± 0.038 0.800 ± 0.09 0.04 0.90 ± 0.047 0.747 ± 0.07 0.03 80-00% 0.3 ± 0.054 0.65 ± 0.035 0.037 Figure (a) T m p-p 0. TeV 0.056 ± 0.0 0.05 ± 0.00 0.43 p-p 0.9 TeV 0.043 ± 0.006 0.070 ± 0.004 0.9 p-p.76 TeV 0.046 ± 0.003 0.064 ± 0.00 0.008 p-p 7 TeV 0.053 ± 0.007 0.056 ± 0.004 0.47 Figure (b) 0-0% 0.09 ± 0.004 0.097 ± 0.00 0.008 0-30% 0.043 ± 0.00 0.075 ± 0.009 4 0.048 ± 0.0 0.066 ± 0.00 0.87 Figure 0-% 0.00 ± 0.038 0.9 ± 0.00.693 0-0% 0.00 ± 0.035 0.7 ± 0.08.44 0-40% 0.004 ± 0.034 0.4 ± 0.08.075 0.003 ± 0.033 0. ± 0.08.97 60-80% 0.005 ± 0.03 0.8 ± 0.08.548 Figure (d) 0.007 ± 0.09 0.6 ± 0.05.0 50-60% 0.055 ± 0.040 0.74 ± 0.03.994 80-90% 0.0 ± 0.08 0.3 ± 0.0.006 Figure (e) 0.007 ± 0.033 0. ± 0.06 0.76 0.036 ± 0.0 0.070 ± 0.006 0.85 80-00% 0.06 ± 0.005 0.09 ± 0.005 0.7 5
(/π ) (d N/dyd ) ( - ) 0 0 0 0 3 (a) p-p, 0. TeV, y <0. π + K + p (x0.) Erlang Tsallis (/N EV ) (d N/dyd ) ( - ) 0 0 0 (b) p-p, 0.9 TeV, y < π + K + p Erlang Tsallis (/N EV ) (d N/dyd ) ( - ) 0 0 0 3 0 4 0 5 p-p, 0.9 TeV, y <0.8 Λ φ Ξ +Ξ + Erlang Tsallis (/N EV ) (d N/dyd ) ( - ) 0 0 0 (d) p-p,.76 TeV, y < π + 0.5 K + p Erlang Tsallis (/N EV ) (d N/dyd ) ( - ) 0 0 0 0.5 (e) p-p, 7 TeV, y < π + 0.5 K + p Erlang Tsallis (/πn EV ) (d N/dyd ) ( - ) 0 3 0 4 0 5 0 6 0 7 0 3 (f) p-p, 7 TeV, y < Ξ Ω Erlang Tsallis 0 4 6 Figure. Transverse momentum spectra of various identified hadrons produced in p-p collisions at (a) s = 0., (b) 0.9, (d).76, and (e)(f) 7 TeV. The symbols represent the experimental data of (a) π +, K +, and p measured by the STAR Collaboration at midrapidity y < 0. [5], (b)(d)(e) π +, K +, and p measured by the CMS Collaboration in the range y < [], Λ, φ, and Ξ + Ξ + measured by the ALICE Collaboration in the range y < 0.8 [], as well as (f) Ξ and Ω measured by the ALICE Collaboration in the range y < [3]. The errors include statistical and systematic errors. The solid and dashed curves are our results with oneor two-component Erlang distribution and Tsallis statistics, respectively. For clarity, the results for p in Figure (a) are scaled by 0. shown in the panels. 6
(/π ) (d N/dyd ) ( - ) 0 0 4 0 8 Cu-Cu, 0. TeV, y <, K 0 S 0-0% (x0 0 ) 0-30% (x0 - ) (x0-4 ) Erlang Tsallis (/π ) (d N/dyd ) ( - ) 0 0 4 0 8 Cu-Cu, 0. TeV, y <, Λ 0 (a) 0 (b) 0 4 6 8 0 Cu-Cu, 0. TeV, y <, Ξ 0 0 4 6 Cu-Cu, 0. TeV, y <, Ω (/π ) (d N/dyd ) ( - ) 0 4 0 8 (/π ) (d N/dyd ) ( - ) 0 4 0 7 0 0 0 (d) 0 4 6 0 4 Figure. Transverse momentum spectra of (a) K 0 s, (b) Λ, Ξ, and (d) Ω produced in Cu- Cu collisions at s NN = 0. TeV. The symbols represent the experimental data of the STAR Collaboration in y < and different centrality intervals of 0 0%, 0 30%, and 40 60% [6]. The error bars are combined statistical and systematic errors. The solid and dashed curves are our results calculated by using the one- or two-component Erlang distribution and Tsallis statistics, respectively. For clarity, the results for different intervals are scaled by different amounts shown in the panels. 7