Probing the Collision Geometry via Two-Photon Processes in Heavy-Ion Collisions

Jiaxuan Luo; Shuai Yang; Wangmei Zha; Xinbai Li; Xin Wu; Zebo Tang; Zhan Zhang

REVIEW

Probing the Collision Geometry via Two-Photon Processes in Heavy-Ion Collisions

Jiaxuan Luo, Xinbai Li, Zebo Tang, Xin Wu, Shuai Yang, Wangmei Zha, Zhan Zhang

High Energy Physics - Phenomenology · Submitted 8 May 2025 · 44 references

Pith's verdict: The Φ_pair observable is a genuine, parameter-free QED prediction that deserves a serious referee, but the paper under-specifies the reaction-plane estimator and therefore overstates its experimental reach.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (deepseek-v4-flash) read the paper on August 15, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 4 major objections · 5 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv ID2505.05133 (version 1)

Pith IDQE3PBONW, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationJiaxuan Luo, Shuai Yang, Wangmei Zha, Xinbai Li, Xin Wu, Zebo Tang, Zhan Zhang. "Probing the Collision Geometry via Two-Photon Processes in Heavy-Ion Collisions." arXiv:2505.05133 (2025). https://pith.science/paper/QE3PBONW

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

The new thing here is the Φ_pair observable, and I think the QED prediction is probably right. The calculation is a standard external-field two-photon amplitude with Woods-Saxon form factors; no free parameters are fitted. They show systematically, across mass, rapidity, impact parameter, and RHIC/LHC energies, that 2⟨cos(2Φ_pair)⟩ stays larger than the Δφ harmonics. That is a genuine extension of the earlier Xiao et al. and Wu et al. results, and the authors are clear about what is new.

What the paper does not have is a concrete experimental path to the angle it wants to measure. Φ_pair is defined relative to the reaction-plane azimuth φ_b, which is not directly observable. The paper says the observable bypasses flow systematics, but it never says how you get φ_b. If you use a hadronic event plane, you are back inside the flow systematics you claimed to avoid; if you try to define the plane from the photon itself, one dilepton per event gives you no internal axis, and using the same QED asymmetry to define the plane would be circular. A ZDC spectator plane could work, but then you need a resolution correction and a careful treatment of how the resolution smears the measured coefficient. None of that is here. The same goes for centrality: Fig. 5 is at fixed b, but real data are a convolution over a centrality bin, and the paper gives no estimate of how much that dilutes the signal. Also, the Monte Carlo results have no error bars, Table 1 integrates p_T^ll down to zero, and there is no comparison to existing STAR data even though the mechanism is closely related to what STAR has already published.

I would not call any of this fatal. The prediction itself is clean, and the gaps are the kind of thing a serious referee can push them to address. But the summary overreaches when it says 'model-independent extraction' and 'bypasses systematic uncertainties.' The honest version is: we predict a large, parameter-free modulation; here is what you would need to measure it, and the estimator question remains open. That is still a solid paper and worth engaging with.

This should go to peer review. A good referee will ask for a section on estimators and resolution, but the core QED result is ready for the community to see.

Referee report

Significance

If the suggested observable can actually be measured, the paper would introduce a qualitatively new geometric probe for relativistic heavy-ion collisions. The strengths are the absence of fitted free parameters, the use of a standard QED formalism, the explicit comparison of several channels (e+e- and mu+mu- at RHIC and LHC energies), and the clear physical picture connecting photon polarization to the momentum orientation of the pair. The main weakness is that the paper stops at fixed-impact-parameter theory; the experimental prerequisites for measuring Phi_pair are not established, and no comparison to existing data is made. The central claim of 'significantly enhanced sensitivity' is therefore not yet a measurable statement, though the underlying QED calculation appears sound.

Major objections (4)

[§II, Eqs. (10)–(11); §IV] Phi_pair and Delta-phi are defined with respect to the impact-parameter azimuth phi_b, and Section IV claims that the proposed framework bypasses the systematic uncertainties of traditional flow methods. However, the paper never specifies how phi_b is experimentally estimated in hadronic Au+Au or Pb+Pb events. A flow-based event-plane estimator would reintroduce the hadronic flow systematics the authors claim to avoid, while a photon-self-referenced estimator would be circular because there is only one dilepton pair per event to define the axis. Without a concrete phi_b estimator and its resolution correction, <cos(2 Phi_pair)> is not an observable, and the central claim about a practical geometry probe is not supported.
[§III, Figs. 2–5] All quantitative results are presented at fixed impact parameter, for example b = 11 fm in Fig. 2 and the b-scan in Fig. 5. A real centrality bin in Au+Au or Pb+Pb averages over a broad distribution of impact parameters, so the measured coefficient is a convolution of the coefficients shown in Fig. 5 with the centrality-dependent P(b). The paper provides no such averaging and no estimate of the resulting dilution, which means the quoted magnitudes of <cos(2 Phi_pair)> and <cos(4 Delta-phi)> are not directly comparable to any measured centrality-selected quantity.
[Table 1; §III, Figs. 3–5] The results are presented without statistical uncertainties on the Monte Carlo coefficients and without any detector angular-resolution smearing. This matters particularly because Table 1 integrates the pair transverse momentum p_T^ll down to zero, where the azimuthal direction of the total pair momentum is poorly determined. The claim that Phi_pair has 'significantly enhanced' sensitivity relative to Delta-phi cannot be assessed without an estimate of the smearing and acceptance effects and some statement of the numerical precision of the VEGAS integration.
[§III, last paragraph; §IV] The paper asserts that the Phi_pair observable can mitigate biases from final-state interactions and separate two-photon processes from hadronic backgrounds, but it provides no quantitative background estimate. In a hadronic heavy-ion environment, contributions from thermal dileptons, hadronic decays, and other QCD processes could dilute or modify the predicted angular modulation. This is a load-bearing feasibility assumption that needs at least a rough estimate before the framework can be advertised as a robust probe.

Minor objections (5)

[§II, Eq. (12)] The notation f[⃗ p±,⃗b] is not defined, and the expression "δ(Φpair(∆ϕ)−f[⃗ p±,⃗b])" appears to contain a typo; please clarify the mapping and the variable being integrated over.
[Fig. 4] The horizontal axis label "1−0.5 −0 0.5 1" is malformed and should read "Pair Rapidity" with tick labels such as -1, -0.5, 0, 0.5, 1.
[§II, §III] The text contains several typographical spacing errors, including "V EGAS" and figure labels like "γ + γ" and "-μ + +μ"; a careful copyedit is needed.
[§I, final paragraph; §IV] The phrase "we demonstrate for the first time" is stronger than warranted for a theoretical calculation; consider replacing it with "we show" or "we find."
[§III, Figs. 3–5] The paper should state the number of Monte Carlo events or the VEGAS convergence criteria used for each panel so the reader can judge the numerical noise in the reported coefficients.

How Pith checks papers → · Full audit of this paper →

The paper

The paper claims

This paper demonstrates that the total momentum orientation of a dilepton pair from two-photon processes in heavy-ion collisions carries significantly enhanced sensitivity to the initial collision geometry.

The reading

This paper tries to establish that the total momentum orientation of a lepton pair produced by two-photon fusion in peripheral heavy-ion collisions carries direct, calculable information about the collision's reaction plane. Using a lowest-order QED calculation with realistic nuclear charge densities, the authors show that the coefficient $2\langle\cos(2\Phi_{\rm pair})\rangle$ is nonzero and increases with impact parameter, reaching values consistently larger than the previously studied $2\langle\cos(4\Delta\phi)\rangle$. If correct, this gives experimentalists a new, QED-calibrated observable for determining the initial collision geometry without relying on hadronic flow models, and would sharpen the extraction of quark-gluon plasma properties by reducing a major source of systematic uncertainty.

What carries the argument

Two ingredients carry the argument. First is the external-field QED amplitude of Ref. [38], evaluated with Woods-Saxon nuclear charge densities, which gives the differential probability $P(p_+,p_-;b)$ and hence the angular correlations relative to the impact-parameter azimuth $\phi_b$; the integrations are done with adaptive Monte Carlo. Second is the geometric mechanism the paper names 'momentum-polarization locking': the electric field of a relativistic nucleus is radially oriented in the transverse plane, so through the Fourier relation $\vec{k}_\perp \leftrightarrow \vec{r}_\perp$ the photon's transverse polarization aligns with its transverse momentum, $\vec{\varepsilon}(\vec{k}_\perp)\parallel \vec{k}_\perp$. Since the $\gamma\gamma\to\ell^+\ell^-$ amplitude is proportional to the polarization overlap $\vec{\varepsilon}_1\cdot\vec{\varepsilon}_2$, maximal overlap occurs when the two photon momenta are collinear, forcing the pair total momentum $\vec{p}_+ + \vec{p}_-$ to point along the impact parameter. That produces the $\cos(2\Phi_{\rm pair})$ modulation and its enhanced sensitivity.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central discovery is that the angular distribution of dileptons from $\gamma\gamma\to\ell^+\ell^-$ in hadronic heavy-ion collisions is modulated not only in the relative-momentum azimuth $\Delta\phi$ but also in the azimuth $\Phi_{\rm pair}$ of the pair's total transverse momentum, and that the latter carries stronger geometric information. Concretely, $2\langle\cos(2\Phi_{\rm pair})\rangle$ remains positive and grows monotonically with the dimuon invariant mass, whereas $2\langle\cos(4\Delta\phi)\rangle$ is non-monotonic; across the whole impact-parameter range, $\langle\cos(2\Phi_{\rm pair})\rangle$ exceeds $\langle\cos(4\Delta\phi)\rangle$. The paper interprets this as a direct imprint of the 'momentum-polarization locking' of quasireal photons: since the photon polarization vector is radial in the transverse plane, the pair's total momentum aligns with the impact-parameter axis. The result is presented as a model-independent, QED-calibrated probe of the reaction plane that complements traditional flow observables.

Load-bearing premise

The calculation assumes an experiment can know the azimuthal angle $\phi_b$ of the impact parameter for each event; the paper does not say how to obtain that angle without flow-based estimators, which would bring back the very uncertainties the new observable is meant to avoid.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

If the predicted $\Phi_{\rm pair}$ modulation is measured, it would give a reaction-plane-sensitive probe that does not assume a particular hydrodynamic response of the medium.
The monotonic rise of $2\langle\cos(2\Phi_{\rm pair})\rangle$ with dimuon invariant mass provides a clean differential signature to help separate photo-induced dileptons from hadronic backgrounds.
Combining $\Delta\phi$ and $\Phi_{\rm pair}$ observables yields two independent measurements of the same geometry, improving the precision of reaction-plane extraction.
Because the same qualitative impact-parameter dependence appears at RHIC and LHC energies, the observable can be compared across collision systems to test the QED polarization mechanism.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The paper leaves the experimental determination of $\phi_b$ open; one plausible route is to define the reference axis from the dilepton pair itself, which would create an autocorrelation whose size the calculation does not estimate.
If the effect survives background subtraction, $\langle\cos(2\Phi_{\rm pair})\rangle$ could be used to calibrate flow-based reaction-plane estimators, turning the flow systematics the authors want to avoid into a measurable cross-check rather than an assumption.
The same polarization-locking logic should apply to other exclusive channels, such as coherent $J/\psi$ photoproduction, where the decay-plane orientation might show an analogous total-momentum modulation; this is a natural extension the paper does not pursue.

Original abstract

The initial collision geometry, including the reaction plane, is crucial for interpreting collective phenomena in relativistic heavy-ion collisions, yet it remains experimentally inaccessible through conventional measurements. Recent studies propose utilizing photon-induced processes as a direct probe, leveraging the complete linear polarization of emitted photons whose orientation strongly correlates with the collision geometry. In this work, we employ a QED-based approach to systematically investigate dilepton production via two-photon processes in heavy-ion collisions at RHIC and LHC energies and detector acceptances. Our calculations reveal that dilepton emission exhibits significant sensitivity to the initial collision geometry through both the azimuthal angles of their emission (defined by the relative momentum vector of the two leptons) and the overall momentum orientation of the dilepton pairs. These findings highlight the potential of two-photon-generated dileptons as a novel, polarization-driven probe to quantify the initial collision geometry and reduce uncertainties in characterizing quark-gluon plasma properties.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 4,395 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.06 · states limitation 0.11 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.03 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.05 · compares with prior results 0.15 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

The initial collision geometry, including the reaction plane, is crucial for interpreting collective phenomena in relativistic heavy-ion collisions, yet it remains experimentally inaccessible through conventional measurements. Recent studies propose utilizing photon-induced processes as a direct probe, leveraging the complete linear polarization of emitted photons whose orientation strongly correlates with the collision geometry. In this work, we employ a QED-based approach to systematically investigate dilepton production via two-photon processes in heavy-ion collisions at RHIC and LHC energies and detector acceptances. Our calculations reveal that dilepton emission exhibits significant sensitivity to the initial collision geometry through both the azimuthal angles of their emission (defined by the relative momentum vector of the two leptons) and the overall momentum orientation of the dilepton pairs. These findings highlight the potential of two-photon-generated dileptons as a novel, polarization-driven probe to quantify the initial collision geometry and reduce uncertainties in characterizing quark-gluon plasma properties.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	The initial collision geometry, including the reaction plane, is crucial for interpreting collective phenomena in relativistic heavy-ion collisions, yet it remains experimentally inaccessible through conventional measurements.	background 0.55	0.05	0.02	asserted 1.00
s1	Recent studies propose utilizing photon-induced processes as a direct probe, leveraging the complete linear polarization of emitted photons whose orientation strongly correlates with the collision geometry.	background 0.98	0.04	0.05	hedged possibility 0.58
s2	In this work, we employ a QED-based approach to systematically investigate dilepton production via two-photon processes in heavy-ion collisions at RHIC and LHC energies and detector acceptances.	contribution 0.62	0.93	0.04	asserted 0.97
s3	Our calculations reveal that dilepton emission exhibits significant sensitivity to the initial collision geometry through both the azimuthal angles of their emission (defined by the relative momentum vector of the two leptons) and the overall momentum orientation of the dilepton pairs.	result 1.00	0.95	0.60	asserted 1.00
s4	These findings highlight the potential of two-photon-generated dileptons as a novel, polarization-driven probe to quantify the initial collision geometry and reduce uncertainties in characterizing quark-gluon plasma properties.	interpretation 1.00	0.60	0.90	hedged possibility 0.80

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: theoretical result 0.45 · evidence from simulation or computation 0.99.

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

Figures

**Figure 1.** Electromagnetic field configuration in transverse plane with

**Figure 2.** The periodic oscillation pattern in the alignment of the

**Figure 3.** Second- and fourth-order modulation coefficients

**Figure 4.** Second- and fourth-order modulation coefficients

**Figure 5.** Second- and fourth-order modulation coefficients 2

Figures reproduced from arXiv:2505.05133 by the authors.

References

Works cited (44)

[1]

P. Braun-Munzinger, J. Stachel, The quest for the quark-gluon plasma. Nature 448, 302–309 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1038/ nature06080

View on Pith 2007
[2]

J. Adams, et al. (STAR), Experimental and theoretical chal- lenges in the search for the quark gluon plasma: The STAR Collaboration’s critical assessment of the evidence from RHIC collisions. Nucl. Phys. A 757, 102–183 (2005). https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2005.03.085

View on Pith doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2005.03.085 2005
[3]

Y . Aoki, G. Endrodi, Z. Fodor, S.D. Katz, K.K. Szabo, The Order of the quantum chromodynamics transition predicted by the standard model of particle physics. Nature 443, 675–678 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05120

View on Pith doi:10.1038/nature05120 2006
[4]

H.T. Ding, F. Karsch, S. Mukherjee, Thermodynamics of strong-interaction matter from Lattice QCD. Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 24(10), 1530007 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1142/ S0218301315300076

View on Pith 2015
[6]

C.H. Zhang, Q.C. Feng, Y .Y . Ren, L.M. Hua, L. Huo, Mag- netic field evolution in Au + Au collisions at √sN N = 200 GeV. Sci. Rep. 13(1), 21500 (2023). https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41598-023-48705-1

View on Pith 2023
[7]

K. Fukushima, T. Hatsuda, The phase diagram of dense QCD. Rept. Prog. Phys. 74, 014001 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1088/ 0034-4885/74/1/014001

View on Pith 2011
[8]

J. Adams, et al. (STAR), Azimuthal anisotropy in Au+Au col- lisions at s(NN)**(1/2) = 200-GeV. Phys. Rev. C 72, 014904 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.72.014904

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevc.72.014904 2005
[9]

D.E. Kharzeev, J. Liao, S.A. V oloshin, G. Wang, Chiral mag- netic and vortical effects in high-energy nuclear collisions—A status report. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 88, 1–28 (2016). https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp.2016.01.001

View on Pith doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2016.01.001 2016
[10]

Z.T. Liang, X.N. Wang, Globally polarized quark-gluon plasma in non-central A+A collisions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 102301 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.94. 102301

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevlett.94 2005
[11]

M. Abdallah, et al. (STAR), Search for the chiral magnetic ef- fect with isobar collisions at √sN N=200 GeV by the STAR Collaboration at the BNL Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider. Phys. Rev. C 105(1), 014901 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevC.105.014901

View on Pith 2022
[12]

D.P. Anderle, et al., Electron-ion collider in China. Front. Phys. (Beijing) 16(6), 64701 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11467-021-1062-0

View on Pith 2021
[13]

J. Chen, et al., Properties of the QCD matter: review of se- lected results from the relativistic heavy ion collider beam en- ergy scan (RHIC BES) program. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 35(12), 214 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41365-024-01591-2

View on Pith doi:10.1007/s41365-024-01591-2 2024
[14]

J.E. Bernhard, J.S. Moreland, S.A. Bass, Bayesian estimation of the specific shear and bulk viscosity of quark–gluon plasma. Nature Phys. 15(11), 1113–1117 (2019). https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41567-019-0611-8

View on Pith 2019
[15]

F. Becattini, M.A. Lisa, Polarization and V orticity in the Quark–Gluon Plasma. Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 70, 395–423 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-nucl-021920-095245

View on Pith doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-021920-095245 2020
[16]

M.L. Miller, K. Reygers, S.J. Sanders, P. Steinberg, Glauber modeling in high energy nuclear collisions. Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 57, 205–243 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev. nucl.57.090506.123020

View on Pith arXiv 2007
[17]

G.Y . Qin, H. Petersen, S.A. Bass, B. Muller, Translation of collision geometry fluctuations into momentum anisotropies in relativistic heavy-ion collisions. Phys. Rev. C 82, 064903 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.82.064903

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevc.82.064903 2010
[18]

B. Alver, et al. (PHOBOS), Non-flow correlations and ellip- tic flow fluctuations in gold-gold collisions at √sN N = 200 GeV. Phys. Rev. C81, 034915 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevC.81.034915

View on Pith 2010
[19]

J. Jia, Event-shape fluctuations and flow correlations in ultra- relativistic heavy-ion collisions. J. Phys. G 41(12), 124003 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/41/12/124003

View on Pith doi:10.1088/0954-3899/41/12/124003 2014
[20]

X. Wu, X. Li, Z. Tang, P. Wang, W. Zha, Reaction plane align- ment with linearly polarized photon in heavy-ion collisions. Phys. Rev. Res.4(4), L042048 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevResearch.4.L042048

View on Pith 2022
[21]

F. Krauss, M. Greiner, G. Soff, Photon and gluon induced processes in relativistic heavy ion collisions. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 39, 503–564 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0146-6410(97)00049-5

View on Pith 1997
[22]

C. Li, J. Zhou, Y .J. Zhou, Probing the linear polarization of photons in ultraperipheral heavy ion collisions. Phys. Lett. B 795, 576–580 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2019. 07.005

View on Pith doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2019 2019
[23]

J. Adam, et al. (STAR), Measurement ofe+e− Momentum and Angular Distributions from Linearly Polarized Photon Colli- sions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 127(5), 052302 (2021). https://doi.org/ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.052302

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevlett.127.052302 2021
[24]

J. Adam, et al. (STAR), Low- pT e+e− pair production in Au+Au collisions at√sN N = 200 GeV and U+U collisions at√sN N = 193 GeV at STAR. Phys. Rev. Lett. 121(13), 132301 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.132301

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevlett.121.132301 2018
[25]

M. Aaboud, et al. (ATLAS), Observation of centrality- dependent acoplanarity for muon pairs produced via two- photon scattering in Pb+Pb collisions at √sNN = 5.02 TeV with the ATLAS detector. Phys. Rev. Lett. 121(21), 212301 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.212301

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevlett.121.212301 2018
[26]

W. Zha, L. Ruan, Z. Tang, Z. Xu, S. Yang, Coherent lepton pair production in hadronic heavy ion collisions. Phys. Lett. B 781, 182–186 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2018. 04.006

View on Pith doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2018 2018
[27]

H.S. Shao, D. d’Enterria, gamma-UPC: automated generation of exclusive photon-photon processes in ultraperipheral proton and nuclear collisions with varying form factors. JHEP09, 248 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2022)248

View on Pith doi:10.1007/jhep09(2022)248 2022
[28]

J. Adam, et al. (STAR), Observation of excess J/ψ yield at very low transverse momenta in Au+Au collisions at√sNN = 200 GeV and U+U collisions at√sNN = 193 GeV. Phys. Rev. Lett. 123(13), 132302 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett. 123.132302

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevlett 2019
[29]

W. Zha, J.D. Brandenburg, L. Ruan, Z. Tang, Z. Xu, Explor- ing the double-slit interference with linearly polarized photons. Phys. Rev. D 103(3), 033007 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/ 7 PhysRevD.103.033007

View on Pith 2021
[30]

K. Shen, X. Wu, Z. Tang, W. Zha, Exploring the photopro- duction of ρ and ϕ in hadronic heavy-ion collisions. Eur. Phys. J. C 84(11), 1167 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/ s10052-024-13503-0

View on Pith doi:10.1140/epjc/ 2024
[31]

X. Wu, X. Li, Z. Tang, K. Wang, W. Zha, Centrality Manipula- tion in Exclusive Photoproduction at the Electron-Ion Collider (2024). arXiv:2410.06676 [hep-ph]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024
[32]

B.W. Xiao, F. Yuan, J. Zhou, Momentum Anisotropy of Lep- tons from Two Photon Processes in Heavy Ion Collisions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 125(23), 232301 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.125.232301

View on Pith 2020
[33]

K. Wang (STAR), Measurements of photon-induced J/ ψ az- imuthal anisotropy in isobar collisions at STAR , in 12th Inter- national Conference on Hard and Electromagnetic Probes of High-Energy Nuclear Collisions (2024)

View on Pith 2024
[34]

W. Zha, J.D. Brandenburg, Z. Tang, Z. Xu, Initial transverse- momentum broadening of Breit-Wheeler process in relativistic heavy-ion collisions. Phys. Lett. B 800, 135089 (2020). https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2019.135089

View on Pith arXiv 2020
[35]

W. Zha, Z. Tang, Discovery of higher-order quantum electro- dynamics effect for the vacuum pair production. JHEP 08, 083 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2021)083

View on Pith doi:10.1007/jhep08(2021)083 2021
[36]

X. Li, J. Luo, Z. Tang, X. Wu, W. Zha, Exploring the higher- order QED effects on the differential distributions of vacuum pair production in relativistic heavy-ion collisions. Phys. Lett. B 847, 138314 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2023. 138314

View on Pith doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023 2023
[37]

S.R. Klein, J. Nystrand, J. Seger, Y . Gorbunov, J. Butter- worth, STARlight: A Monte Carlo simulation program for ultra-peripheral collisions of relativistic ions. Comput. Phys. Commun. 212, 258–268 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc. 2016.10.016

View on Pith doi:10.1016/j.cpc 2017
[38]

M. Vidovic, M. Greiner, C. Best, G. Soff, Impact parameter dependence of the electromagnetic particle production in ultra- relativistic heavy ion collisions. Phys. Rev. C 47, 2308–2319 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.47.2308

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevc.47.2308 1993
[39]

C.W. De Jager, H. De Vries, C. De Vries, Nuclear charge and magnetization density distribution parameters from elastic electron scattering. Atom. Data Nucl. Data Tabl. 14, 479–508 (1974). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-640X(74)80002-1

View on Pith doi:10.1016/s0092-640x(74)80002-1 1974
[40]

H. De Vries, C.W. De Jager, C. De Vries, Nuclear charge and magnetization density distribution parameters from elastic electron scattering. Atom. Data Nucl. Data Tabl. 36, 495–536 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-640X(87)90013-1

View on Pith doi:10.1016/0092-640x(87)90013-1 1987
[41]

K. Hencken, D. Trautmann, G. Baur, Impact parameter depen- dence of the total probability for the electromagnetic electron - positron pair production in relativistic heavy ion collisions. Phys. Rev. A 51, 1874–1882 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevA.51.1874

View on Pith 1995
[42]

R.N. Lee, A.I. Milstein, Coulomb corrections to the e+ e- pair production in ultrarelativistic heavy-ion collisions. Phys. Rev. A 61, 032103 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.61. 032103

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physreva.61 2000
[43]

R.N. Lee, A.I. Milstein, Coulomb corrections and multiple e+ e- pair production in ultrarelativistic nuclear collisions. Phys. Rev. A 64, 032106 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA. 64.032106

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physreva 2001
[44]

G.P. Lepage, A New Algorithm for Adaptive Multidimensional Integration. J. Comput. Phys. 27, 192 (1978). https://doi.org/ 10.1016/0021-9991(78)90004-9

View on Pith doi:10.1016/0021-9991(78)90004-9 1978
[45]

I. Antcheva, et al., ROOT: A C++ framework for petabyte data storage, statistical analysis and visualization. Comput. Phys. Commun. 180, 2499–2512 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j. cpc.2009.08.005

View on Pith doi:10.1016/j 2009

Forward citations

Cited by 2 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

Spin-dependent azimuthal asymmetry of coherent J/$\psi$ photoproduction in hadronic PbPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.36 TeV
nucl-ex 2026-09 accept novelty 7.0 of 10

The amplitude A2 of the second-order harmonic modulation of muons from coherent J/psi photoproduction is measured to be -0.194, more than five sigma from zero.
Photon-induced $J/\psi$ as a linearly polarized probe of collision geometry in relativistic heavy-ion collisions
nucl-ex 2026-09 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

STAR reports a negative second-order modulation A_2^phot = -0.39 +/- 0.11 (stat.) +/- 0.04 (sys.) for J/psi at low transverse momentum in Ru+Ru and Zr+Zr collisions, indicating that the J/psi polarization is correlate...

How the literature uses it

What this paper does with the arXiv papers it cites

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [1]

P. Braun-Munzinger, J. Stachel, The quest for the quark-gluon plasma. Nature 448, 302–309 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1038/ nature06080

View on Pith 2007

[2] [2]

J. Adams, et al. (STAR), Experimental and theoretical chal- lenges in the search for the quark gluon plasma: The STAR Collaboration’s critical assessment of the evidence from RHIC collisions. Nucl. Phys. A 757, 102–183 (2005). https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2005.03.085

View on Pith doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2005.03.085 2005

[3] [3]

Y . Aoki, G. Endrodi, Z. Fodor, S.D. Katz, K.K. Szabo, The Order of the quantum chromodynamics transition predicted by the standard model of particle physics. Nature 443, 675–678 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05120

View on Pith doi:10.1038/nature05120 2006

[4] [4]

H.T. Ding, F. Karsch, S. Mukherjee, Thermodynamics of strong-interaction matter from Lattice QCD. Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 24(10), 1530007 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1142/ S0218301315300076

View on Pith 2015

[5] [6]

C.H. Zhang, Q.C. Feng, Y .Y . Ren, L.M. Hua, L. Huo, Mag- netic field evolution in Au + Au collisions at √sN N = 200 GeV. Sci. Rep. 13(1), 21500 (2023). https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41598-023-48705-1

View on Pith 2023

[6] [7]

K. Fukushima, T. Hatsuda, The phase diagram of dense QCD. Rept. Prog. Phys. 74, 014001 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1088/ 0034-4885/74/1/014001

View on Pith 2011

[7] [8]

J. Adams, et al. (STAR), Azimuthal anisotropy in Au+Au col- lisions at s(NN)**(1/2) = 200-GeV. Phys. Rev. C 72, 014904 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.72.014904

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevc.72.014904 2005

[8] [9]

D.E. Kharzeev, J. Liao, S.A. V oloshin, G. Wang, Chiral mag- netic and vortical effects in high-energy nuclear collisions—A status report. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 88, 1–28 (2016). https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.ppnp.2016.01.001

View on Pith doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2016.01.001 2016

[9] [10]

Z.T. Liang, X.N. Wang, Globally polarized quark-gluon plasma in non-central A+A collisions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 102301 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.94. 102301

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevlett.94 2005

[10] [11]

M. Abdallah, et al. (STAR), Search for the chiral magnetic ef- fect with isobar collisions at √sN N=200 GeV by the STAR Collaboration at the BNL Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider. Phys. Rev. C 105(1), 014901 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevC.105.014901

View on Pith 2022

[11] [12]

D.P. Anderle, et al., Electron-ion collider in China. Front. Phys. (Beijing) 16(6), 64701 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11467-021-1062-0

View on Pith 2021

[12] [13]

J. Chen, et al., Properties of the QCD matter: review of se- lected results from the relativistic heavy ion collider beam en- ergy scan (RHIC BES) program. Nucl. Sci. Tech. 35(12), 214 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1007/s41365-024-01591-2

View on Pith doi:10.1007/s41365-024-01591-2 2024

[13] [14]

J.E. Bernhard, J.S. Moreland, S.A. Bass, Bayesian estimation of the specific shear and bulk viscosity of quark–gluon plasma. Nature Phys. 15(11), 1113–1117 (2019). https://doi.org/10. 1038/s41567-019-0611-8

View on Pith 2019

[14] [15]

F. Becattini, M.A. Lisa, Polarization and V orticity in the Quark–Gluon Plasma. Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 70, 395–423 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-nucl-021920-095245

View on Pith doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-021920-095245 2020

[15] [16]

M.L. Miller, K. Reygers, S.J. Sanders, P. Steinberg, Glauber modeling in high energy nuclear collisions. Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 57, 205–243 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev. nucl.57.090506.123020

View on Pith arXiv 2007

[16] [17]

G.Y . Qin, H. Petersen, S.A. Bass, B. Muller, Translation of collision geometry fluctuations into momentum anisotropies in relativistic heavy-ion collisions. Phys. Rev. C 82, 064903 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.82.064903

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevc.82.064903 2010

[17] [18]

B. Alver, et al. (PHOBOS), Non-flow correlations and ellip- tic flow fluctuations in gold-gold collisions at √sN N = 200 GeV. Phys. Rev. C81, 034915 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevC.81.034915

View on Pith 2010

[18] [19]

J. Jia, Event-shape fluctuations and flow correlations in ultra- relativistic heavy-ion collisions. J. Phys. G 41(12), 124003 (2014). https://doi.org/10.1088/0954-3899/41/12/124003

View on Pith doi:10.1088/0954-3899/41/12/124003 2014

[19] [20]

X. Wu, X. Li, Z. Tang, P. Wang, W. Zha, Reaction plane align- ment with linearly polarized photon in heavy-ion collisions. Phys. Rev. Res.4(4), L042048 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevResearch.4.L042048

View on Pith 2022

[20] [21]

F. Krauss, M. Greiner, G. Soff, Photon and gluon induced processes in relativistic heavy ion collisions. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 39, 503–564 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/ S0146-6410(97)00049-5

View on Pith 1997

[21] [22]

C. Li, J. Zhou, Y .J. Zhou, Probing the linear polarization of photons in ultraperipheral heavy ion collisions. Phys. Lett. B 795, 576–580 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2019. 07.005

View on Pith doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2019 2019

[22] [23]

J. Adam, et al. (STAR), Measurement ofe+e− Momentum and Angular Distributions from Linearly Polarized Photon Colli- sions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 127(5), 052302 (2021). https://doi.org/ 10.1103/PhysRevLett.127.052302

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevlett.127.052302 2021

[23] [24]

J. Adam, et al. (STAR), Low- pT e+e− pair production in Au+Au collisions at√sN N = 200 GeV and U+U collisions at√sN N = 193 GeV at STAR. Phys. Rev. Lett. 121(13), 132301 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.132301

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevlett.121.132301 2018

[24] [25]

M. Aaboud, et al. (ATLAS), Observation of centrality- dependent acoplanarity for muon pairs produced via two- photon scattering in Pb+Pb collisions at √sNN = 5.02 TeV with the ATLAS detector. Phys. Rev. Lett. 121(21), 212301 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.212301

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevlett.121.212301 2018

[25] [26]

W. Zha, L. Ruan, Z. Tang, Z. Xu, S. Yang, Coherent lepton pair production in hadronic heavy ion collisions. Phys. Lett. B 781, 182–186 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2018. 04.006

View on Pith doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2018 2018

[26] [27]

H.S. Shao, D. d’Enterria, gamma-UPC: automated generation of exclusive photon-photon processes in ultraperipheral proton and nuclear collisions with varying form factors. JHEP09, 248 (2022). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP09(2022)248

View on Pith doi:10.1007/jhep09(2022)248 2022

[27] [28]

J. Adam, et al. (STAR), Observation of excess J/ψ yield at very low transverse momenta in Au+Au collisions at√sNN = 200 GeV and U+U collisions at√sNN = 193 GeV. Phys. Rev. Lett. 123(13), 132302 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett. 123.132302

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevlett 2019

[28] [29]

W. Zha, J.D. Brandenburg, L. Ruan, Z. Tang, Z. Xu, Explor- ing the double-slit interference with linearly polarized photons. Phys. Rev. D 103(3), 033007 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1103/ 7 PhysRevD.103.033007

View on Pith 2021

[29] [30]

K. Shen, X. Wu, Z. Tang, W. Zha, Exploring the photopro- duction of ρ and ϕ in hadronic heavy-ion collisions. Eur. Phys. J. C 84(11), 1167 (2024). https://doi.org/10.1140/epjc/ s10052-024-13503-0

View on Pith doi:10.1140/epjc/ 2024

[30] [31]

X. Wu, X. Li, Z. Tang, K. Wang, W. Zha, Centrality Manipula- tion in Exclusive Photoproduction at the Electron-Ion Collider (2024). arXiv:2410.06676 [hep-ph]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024

[31] [32]

B.W. Xiao, F. Yuan, J. Zhou, Momentum Anisotropy of Lep- tons from Two Photon Processes in Heavy Ion Collisions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 125(23), 232301 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevLett.125.232301

View on Pith 2020

[32] [33]

K. Wang (STAR), Measurements of photon-induced J/ ψ az- imuthal anisotropy in isobar collisions at STAR , in 12th Inter- national Conference on Hard and Electromagnetic Probes of High-Energy Nuclear Collisions (2024)

View on Pith 2024

[33] [34]

W. Zha, J.D. Brandenburg, Z. Tang, Z. Xu, Initial transverse- momentum broadening of Breit-Wheeler process in relativistic heavy-ion collisions. Phys. Lett. B 800, 135089 (2020). https: //doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2019.135089

View on Pith arXiv 2020

[34] [35]

W. Zha, Z. Tang, Discovery of higher-order quantum electro- dynamics effect for the vacuum pair production. JHEP 08, 083 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP08(2021)083

View on Pith doi:10.1007/jhep08(2021)083 2021

[35] [36]

X. Li, J. Luo, Z. Tang, X. Wu, W. Zha, Exploring the higher- order QED effects on the differential distributions of vacuum pair production in relativistic heavy-ion collisions. Phys. Lett. B 847, 138314 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.physletb.2023. 138314

View on Pith doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2023 2023

[36] [37]

S.R. Klein, J. Nystrand, J. Seger, Y . Gorbunov, J. Butter- worth, STARlight: A Monte Carlo simulation program for ultra-peripheral collisions of relativistic ions. Comput. Phys. Commun. 212, 258–268 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cpc. 2016.10.016

View on Pith doi:10.1016/j.cpc 2017

[37] [38]

M. Vidovic, M. Greiner, C. Best, G. Soff, Impact parameter dependence of the electromagnetic particle production in ultra- relativistic heavy ion collisions. Phys. Rev. C 47, 2308–2319 (1993). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.47.2308

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physrevc.47.2308 1993

[38] [39]

C.W. De Jager, H. De Vries, C. De Vries, Nuclear charge and magnetization density distribution parameters from elastic electron scattering. Atom. Data Nucl. Data Tabl. 14, 479–508 (1974). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-640X(74)80002-1

View on Pith doi:10.1016/s0092-640x(74)80002-1 1974

[39] [40]

H. De Vries, C.W. De Jager, C. De Vries, Nuclear charge and magnetization density distribution parameters from elastic electron scattering. Atom. Data Nucl. Data Tabl. 36, 495–536 (1987). https://doi.org/10.1016/0092-640X(87)90013-1

View on Pith doi:10.1016/0092-640x(87)90013-1 1987

[40] [41]

K. Hencken, D. Trautmann, G. Baur, Impact parameter depen- dence of the total probability for the electromagnetic electron - positron pair production in relativistic heavy ion collisions. Phys. Rev. A 51, 1874–1882 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1103/ PhysRevA.51.1874

View on Pith 1995

[41] [42]

R.N. Lee, A.I. Milstein, Coulomb corrections to the e+ e- pair production in ultrarelativistic heavy-ion collisions. Phys. Rev. A 61, 032103 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.61. 032103

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physreva.61 2000

[42] [43]

R.N. Lee, A.I. Milstein, Coulomb corrections and multiple e+ e- pair production in ultrarelativistic nuclear collisions. Phys. Rev. A 64, 032106 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA. 64.032106

View on Pith doi:10.1103/physreva 2001

[43] [44]

G.P. Lepage, A New Algorithm for Adaptive Multidimensional Integration. J. Comput. Phys. 27, 192 (1978). https://doi.org/ 10.1016/0021-9991(78)90004-9

View on Pith doi:10.1016/0021-9991(78)90004-9 1978

[44] [45]

I. Antcheva, et al., ROOT: A C++ framework for petabyte data storage, statistical analysis and visualization. Comput. Phys. Commun. 180, 2499–2512 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1016/j. cpc.2009.08.005

View on Pith doi:10.1016/j 2009