Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 5 minor 59 references

The paper claims that the observed enhancement of the Lambda_c/D0 ratio in Au+Au collisions at RHIC is driven by quark coalescence, not fragmentation, and that an improved AMPT transport model reproduces this enhancement only when coalescen

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 09:51 UTC pith:PMD2ARPW

load-bearing objection A plausible AMPT-based explanation of the STAR Lambda_c/D0 enhancement, but the central claim leans on a hand-set, system-dependent m_T cutoff that the paper itself does not systematically test. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2601.12287 v1 pith:PMD2ARPW submitted 2026-01-18 hep-ph nucl-th

Open charm production and Λ_(c)⁺/D⁰ ratio in pp and Au+Au collisions at the RHIC

Bijun Fan , Chao Zhang , Liang Zheng , Shusu Shi This is my paper
classification hep-ph nucl-th PACS 25.75.-q14.20.Lq
keywords open charmLambda_c/D0 ratiocoalescencefragmentationAMPT modelRHICAu+Au collisionsnuclear modification factor
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The paper tries to establish that charm quarks in heavy-ion collisions at 200 GeV per nucleon pair hadronize predominantly by coalescence with light quarks at low and intermediate transverse momentum, which is why more charm baryons (Lambda_c) are produced relative to charm mesons (D0) than in proton-proton collisions. Using an improved AMPT model with a hybrid hadronization scheme, the authors reproduce the measured D0 and Lambda_c spectra, the D0 nuclear modification factor, and the Lambda_c/D0 ratio from STAR. They show that a fragmentation-only calculation underestimates the Au+Au-to-pp enhancement of the ratio, while the combined coalescence plus fragmentation mechanism matches the data. If correct, this means coalescence is the dominant charm-baryon hadronization channel in the quark-gluon plasma at RHIC energies, and the model provides a unified description of charm hadron observables.

Core claim

Within the improved AMPT string-melting model, charm quarks are taken directly from HIJING initial hard scatterings, given Cronin momentum broadening, and hadronized by a competitive hybrid scheme: spatial coalescence with nearby light quarks (subject to distance and invariant-mass cuts) plus independent fragmentation via the Peterson function. The model reproduces the STAR D0 and Lambda_c spectra and the Lambda_c/D0 ratio in 10-80% Au+Au collisions, and predicts a Lambda_c/D0 ratio near 0.5-0.8 at intermediate pT, well above the pp baseline. Decomposing the ratio, the authors find that pure fragmentation yields a nearly flat, small ratio, whereas pure coalescence produces values above unity

What carries the argument

A hybrid charm hadronization scheme inside the improved AMPT model: charm quarks first attempt spatial coalescence with thermal light quarks under constraints on relative distance (d < pr) and invariant mass (minv < mH), and a hand-set transverse-mass threshold mT (= 2.0 GeV for pp, 3.3 GeV for Au+Au) separates a low-pT coalescence-dominated regime from a high-pT fragmentation-dominated regime. Unmatched charm quarks fragment via the Peterson function with epsilon_Q = 0.05, and a baryon-enhancement parameter r_HQ_BM = 2 tunes the baryon-to-meson ratio in coalescence. This machinery allows the model to decompose the Lambda_c/D0 ratio into pure coalescence, pure fragmentation, and combined con

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the hand-set transverse-mass threshold mT = 3.3 GeV for Au+Au versus 2.0 GeV for pp legitimately separates low-density and high-density hadronization regimes; if this threshold is arbitrary or should be the same in both systems, the fragmentation-only channel might already describe the data and the claimed coalescence enhancement could disappear.

What would settle it

Measure the Lambda_c/D0 ratio in pp collisions at sqrt(s) = 200 GeV at STAR; if it is as high as the Au+Au ratio (about 0.5-0.8 for pT between 3 and 6 GeV/c), then the medium-specific coalescence enhancement is not required, contradicting the paper's central claim. Alternatively, a parameter scan varying the mT cutoff between pp and Au+Au to the same value and showing the Au+Au-to-pp ratio difference persists would falsify the specific mechanism as implemented.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

  • Lambda_c's nuclear modification factor R_AA should show less suppression than D0's at intermediate pT in central Au+Au collisions, a prediction the paper makes explicitly.
  • The Lambda_c/D0 ratio should increase with centrality and with system size from pp to Au+Au; future STAR measurements in 0-10% and 40-80% Au+Au can test this.
  • In pp collisions, the Lambda_c/D0 ratio should stay close to the fragmentation-only baseline, providing a clear experimental discriminator once STAR measures Lambda_c in pp.
  • The same coalescence mechanism should affect other charm baryons (e.g., Xi_c) and bottom hadrons, and the extracted parameters can constrain charm-quark thermalization in the medium.
  • The model offers a unified event-by-event platform to compute heavy-flavor spectra, R_AA, and baryon-to-meson ratios simultaneously, which can be extended to other collision energies and systems.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The hand-set mT cutoff (2.0 GeV for pp, 3.3 GeV for Au+Au) effectively encodes the entire system-size dependence; a derivation of this threshold from local parton density rather than a fitted parameter would make the coalescence claim much stronger.
  • If the same model is applied to LHC Pb-Pb data at 5.02 TeV, where ALICE has measured Lambda_c/D0, and the mT cutoff must be re-tuned significantly, it would indicate that the threshold is not universal and that the specific coalescence mechanism may be overfit to RHIC data.
  • The coalescence picture predicts a non-trivial pT dependence for the Lambda_c elliptic flow v2 in Au+Au; a comparison with upcoming STAR Lambda_c v2 measurements could confirm or rule out the kinematic regime where coalescence dominates.
  • The decomposition shown in the paper suggests that the combined ratio is a pT-weighted average of the coalescence and fragmentation ratios; this weighting could be modeled analytically and used to predict ratios for other charmed hadrons, such as Xi_c/D0.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper presents an improved string-melting AMPT calculation of open charm production in pp and Au+Au collisions at sqrt(s_NN)=200 GeV. Charm pairs are taken from HIJING, propagated through ZPC, and hadronized via a hybrid scheme combining spatial/invariant-mass coalescence (Eqs. 1-2) with Peterson fragmentation, supplemented by a system-dependent transverse-mass threshold (Eq. 4) set to 2.0 GeV in pp and 3.3 GeV in Au+Au. The model is compared with STAR data for D0 spectra, D0 R_AA, the Lambda_c spectrum, and the Lambda_c/D0 ratio, and it reproduces the main trends. A decomposition of the ratio into coalescence and fragmentation contributions is used to conclude that coalescence drives the charm-baryon enhancement at low/intermediate pT.

Significance. If the central claim were fully supported, the paper would provide a valuable unified transport-model description of D0 and Lambda_c production at RHIC and evidence for coalescence-dominated charm-baryon hadronization at low/intermediate pT. The model covers multiple observables in a single event-by-event framework, and the direct comparison with the not-fitted Lambda_c data in Fig. 4 is a genuine strength. However, the manuscript itself acknowledges that the hadronization parameters are not uniquely constrained and that no systematic scan was performed. The central attribution of the enhancement to coalescence is currently entangled with hand-set, system-dependent parameters, especially the m_T threshold, so the paper does not yet establish the mechanism as robustly as the abstract claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [§II, Eq. (4) and following text] The transverse-mass threshold is hand-set and system-dependent: m_T = 3.3 GeV for Au+Au and 2.0 GeV for pp. Because hadrons with m_T below the threshold are 'assigned to the coalescence directly,' this parameter directly controls the coalescence share. For Lambda_c (m_H=2.286 GeV), the Au+Au threshold corresponds to p_T ≈ 2.4 GeV/c, and the pp threshold is below the hadron mass, so the threshold itself creates a large system asymmetry. The STAR Lambda_c/D0 enhancement in Fig. 4 extends to 3-6 GeV/c, so the claim that coalescence drives it depends on extrapolation beyond the direct-assignment region, governed by Eqs. (1)-(2) and r_HQ_BM, which are not varied. The systematics paragraph before Sec. IV concedes that no parameter scan was performed. Since the central conclusion is not decoupled from this threshold choice, an independent justification or a sensitivity scan is required.
  2. [§II parameter choices and §III, Figs. 2-3] The model parameters are calibrated to the data used for validation: p_r and p_m are fitted to the pp D0 spectrum, r_HQ_BM=2 is fixed to reproduce the integrated D0 yield in central Au+Au, and delta is constrained by d+Au D0 data. Thus the good D0 spectral and R_AA agreement in Figs. 2(a) and 3(a) is partly by construction. The genuinely independent test is the Lambda_c spectrum and the Lambda_c/D0 ratio in Fig. 4, which are not used in the fit and deserve emphasis. However, the decomposition in Fig. 5 relies on the same tuned parameters, so the extracted coalescence contribution is not an independent hadronization probe. A parameter scan around the chosen values is needed to establish that the Lambda_c/D0 enhancement is not an artifact of the calibration.
  3. [§III, Fig. 4 and Sec. IV] The abstract and summary state that fragmentation alone underestimates the enhancement in Au+Au relative to pp. This relative-to-pp statement uses a pp baseline that is entirely a model prediction: STAR has no published Lambda_c spectrum in pp at 200 GeV. The pp Lambda_c/D0 curve in Fig. 4 is produced with the same hybrid scheme and with the pp m_T threshold set to 2.0 GeV, which suppresses coalescence in pp by construction. A different pp threshold would change the predicted 'enhancement relative to pp.' The Au+Au comparison with STAR in Fig. 4 is meaningful, but the relative-to-pp claim is not yet a data-driven statement. The authors should either validate the pp baseline with data or soften the claim.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Abstract] Typo: 'improved a multi-phase transport' should be 'an improved multi-phase transport'.
  2. [Fig. 3 caption] Typo: 'referenced in the txet' should be 'referenced in the text'.
  3. [§II, after Eq. (4)] The sentence 'The parameterm T = 2.0 for pp andm T = 3.3' is missing units (GeV) and the notation is inconsistent (m_T vs m_T).
  4. [General] Several typos: 'pre-coalescenced' should be 'pre-coalesced'; 'Figure. 1' should be 'Figure 1'; in §III, 'coalescence criteria (pr, pm)' should be '(p_r, p_m)'.
  5. [Eq. (3)] The Peterson fragmentation function is cited through Ref. [54] (PYTHIA/JETSET); the original Peterson et al. reference should also be cited.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged

Partial circularity: the attribution of the Λc+/D0 enhancement to coalescence is largely set by hand-tuned, system-dependent inputs (m_T=2.0/3.3 GeV and r_BM^HQ=2), although the STAR Λc/D0 data comparison itself is not a fit target and retains independent content.

specific steps
  1. self definitional [Section II, text after Eq. (4); Section III, Fig. 5 discussion]
    "The pre-coalescenced heavy hadrons with m_T below the given threshold are assigned to the coalescence directly. In practice, The parameter m_T = 2.0 for pp and m_T = 3.3 for Au+Au at sqrt(s_NN) = 200 GeV. This selection effectively enhances the coalescence probability at low p_T in the nuclear environment ... In particular, different transverse mass selections are employed in small and large systems to account for their distinct partonic environments and to regulate the relative importance of coalescence and fragmentation."

    The coalescence contribution is not an emergent model output: the m_T cut is an input that defines which hadrons count as coalescence products. Setting m_T=3.3 for Au+Au and 2.0 for pp mechanically assigns more low/intermediate-pT hadrons to coalescence in Au+Au, so Fig. 5's conclusion that 'coalescence dominates and drives the enhancement' restates this choice. The paper explicitly says the selection is used to 'regulate the relative importance of coalescence and fragmentation.' Since no scan of m_T is shown, the claimed robustness of the coalescence attribution is asserted, not demonstrated.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Section II, parameter setting paragraph]
    "We find that varying r_BM^HQ has a noticeable effect on the heavy flavor baryon-to-meson ratio in AA, while the effect for pp collisions is relatively small ... In practice, we fix r_BM^HQ = 2 for charm, which allows us to reproduce the integrated D0 yield in central Au+Au collisions without spoiling the description of the pp baseline."

    r_BM^HQ directly controls the charm baryon-to-meson yield in the coalescence channel and is fixed to reproduce a measured charm yield in Au+Au. The summary claim that 'the observed baryon enhancement at intermediate pT is driven by the coalescence mechanism' therefore inherits this tuned parameter. However, the STAR Λc+/D0 ratio in Fig. 4 was not used directly in the fit, so the data comparison is not statistically forced; this is why the circularity is only partial.

full rationale

The paper makes a genuine, externally anchored comparison: the STAR Λc+/D0 data in Fig. 4 were not listed among the fit targets (p_r,p_m are fit to pp D0, δ to d+Au D0, and r_BM^HQ to the Au+Au D0 yield), so the model's agreement with the baryon/meson ratio is not a pure re-derivation of its inputs. The circularity lies in the interpretive step: the system-dependent m_T threshold (2.0 vs 3.3 GeV) and r_BM^HQ=2 are hand-set parameters that regulate how much coalescence contributes in each system, and the paper's central conclusion that coalescence drives the low/intermediate-pT Λc+/D0 enhancement is largely a restatement of that regulation. The authors acknowledge 'the present agreement does not uniquely constrain the hadronization parameters' and that a systematic scan is 'beyond the scope of the present work,' yet assert the qualitative conclusion is robust. No load-bearing self-citation chain or uniqueness argument was found; the model is compared against external STAR data, so the score is 4 rather than 6+.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

6 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on a transport model with six tunable parameters, three of which are directly fit to the D0 data being used as baseline, plus an ad hoc system-dependent transverse-mass cutoff. The model is not derived from first principles; its predictive power is constrained by the independent Lambda_c/D0 measurement, but the mechanism attribution is substantially shaped by the free parameters.

free parameters (6)
  • p_r (coalescence spatial cut) = 0.5 fm
    Determined from a fit to the D0 meson pT spectrum in pp collisions at sqrt(s)=200 GeV (Sec. II).
  • p_m (invariant-mass cut coefficient) = 0.5
    Determined from a fit to the D0 meson pT spectrum in pp collisions (Sec. II).
  • m_T threshold (transverse-mass selection) = 2.0 GeV (pp), 3.3 GeV (Au+Au)
    Hand-set, system-dependent cutoff separating coalescence and fragmentation regimes; directly controls the coalescence contribution to the Lambda_c/D0 enhancement.
  • r_HQ_BM (baryon-to-meson ratio in coalescence) = 2
    Fixed 'to reproduce the integrated D0 yield in central Au+Au collisions without spoiling the description of the pp baseline' (Sec. II).
  • delta (Cronin broadening strength) = 1
    Constrained from D0 spectra in d+Au collisions at RHIC in previous work (Sec. II, 'following our previous work').
  • epsilon_Q (Peterson fragmentation parameter) = 0.05
    Standard value for charm quarks in the Peterson fragmentation function (Sec. II, Eq. 3).
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption Charm-anticharm pairs are produced in initial hard scatterings and propagate through a deconfined partonic medium described by ZPC after formation time t_F = E/m_T^2.
    Standard heavy-quark production picture in heavy-ion collisions; invoked in Sec. II for the improved AMPT setup.
  • ad hoc to paper Spatial quark coalescence with nearest-neighbor light quarks, subject to the distance and invariant-mass criteria in Eqs. (1)-(2), is a valid hadronization mechanism.
    The specific criteria and the use of constituent quark masses are model choices not derived from first principles.
  • domain assumption The Peterson fragmentation function describes vacuum-like charm hadronization at high pT.
    Standard phenomenological choice; cited to Refs. [52-54].
  • ad hoc to paper The hand-set m_T threshold legitimately separates low-density (fragmentation) and high-density (coalescence) hadronization regimes in pp and Au+Au.
    Motivated by qualitative arguments about partonic density, but the specific values 2.0/3.3 GeV are not derived from an independent principle.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 36 in / 13669 out tokens · 307892 ms · 2026-08-03T09:51:51.955074+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
read the original abstract

We study open charm hadrons production in pp and Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 200$~GeV using an improved a multi-phase transport (AMPT) model. Specifically, we show the transverse-momentum spectra and nuclear modification factors $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$ of $D^{0}$ mesons and $\Lambda_{c}^{+}$ baryons, as well as the $\Lambda_{c}^{+}/D^{0}$ ratio in pp and Au+Au collisions. The results obtained from the AMPT model simulations are compared with the STAR experimental data and found to be consistent. We further investigate the $\Lambda_{c}^{+}/D^{0}$ ratio by evaluating contributions from coalescence, fragmentation, and the combined coalescence+fragmentation mechanisms, and we find that fragmentation alone underestimates the pronounced enhancement in Au+Au relative to pp at low and intermediate $p_{\mathrm{T}}$, whereas the coalescence+fragmentation mechanism reproduces the observed trend significantly better. These results indicate that coalescence plays a key role in charm baryon productions and helps constrain the relative importance of different hadronization mechanisms in the ultra-relativistic nuclear collisions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2601.12287 by Bijun Fan, Chao Zhang, Liang Zheng, Shusu Shi.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. Transverse momentum spectra of (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: shows the RAA(pT) for D0 mesons and Λ+ c baryons at mid-rapidity in Au+Au collisions at √ sNN = 200 GeV. For all centrality intervals, the RAA of D0 rises from values below unity at very low pT to a maximum near pT ∼ 2-3 GeV/c, and then decreases gradually at higher pT, where a sizable suppression with respect to the binary-scaled pp reference is observed. At lower pT, the enhancing behavior of the RAA dep… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. Transverse momentum dependence of the Λ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_4.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. Transverse momentum dependence of the Λ [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗

discussion (0)

Sign in with ORCID, Apple, or X to comment. Anyone can read and Pith papers without signing in.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

59 extracted references · 44 linked inside Pith

  1. [1]

    Gyulassy and L

    M. Gyulassy and L. McLerran, New forms of QCD mat- ter discovered at RHIC, Nucl. Phys. A750, 30 (2005), arXiv:nucl-th/0405013

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  2. [2]

    Adcox et al

    K. Adcox et al. (PHENIX), Formation of dense partonic matter in relativistic nucleus-nucleus collisions at RHIC: Experimental evaluation by the PHENIX collaboration, Nucl. Phys. A757, 184 (2005), arXiv:nucl-ex/0410003

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  3. [3]

    Adams et al

    J. Adams et al. (STAR), Experimental and theoretical challenges in the search for the quark gluon plasma: The STAR Collaboration’s critical assessment of the evidence from RHIC collisions, Nucl. Phys. A757, 102 (2005), arXiv:nucl-ex/0501009

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  4. [4]

    Chen et al., Properties of the QCD matter: review of selected results from the relativistic heavy ion collider beam energy scan (RHIC BES) program, Nucl

    J. Chen et al., Properties of the QCD matter: review of selected results from the relativistic heavy ion collider beam energy scan (RHIC BES) program, Nucl. Sci. Tech. 35, 214 (2024), arXiv:2407.02935 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  5. [5]

    X. Luo, S. Shi, N. Xu, and Y. Zhang, A Study of the Properties of the QCD Phase Diagram in High- Energy Nuclear Collisions, Particles3, 278 (2020), arXiv:2004.00789 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  6. [6]

    Bzdak et al., Mapping the Phases of Quantum Chro- modynamics with Beam Energy Scan, Phys

    A. Bzdak et al., Mapping the Phases of Quantum Chro- modynamics with Beam Energy Scan, Phys. Rept.853, 1 (2020)

    2020

  7. [7]

    Muller and X.-N

    B. Muller and X.-N. Wang, Probing parton thermaliza- tion time with charm production, Phys. Rev. Lett.68, 2437 (1992)

    1992

  8. [8]

    Lin and M

    Z.-w. Lin and M. Gyulassy, Open charm as a probe of preequilibrium dynamics in nuclear collisions, Phys. Rev. C51, 2177 (1995), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.C 52, 440 (1995)], arXiv:nucl-th/9409007

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  9. [9]

    van Hees, V

    H. van Hees, V. Greco, and R. Rapp, Heavy-quark probes of the quark-gluon plasma at RHIC, Phys. Rev. C73, 034913 (2006), arXiv:nucl-th/0508055

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  10. [10]

    Brambilla et al., Heavy Quarkonium: Progress, Puz- zles, and Opportunities, Eur

    N. Brambilla et al., Heavy Quarkonium: Progress, Puz- zles, and Opportunities, Eur. Phys. J. C71, 1534 (2011), arXiv:1010.5827 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2011

  11. [11]

    Andronic et al., Heavy-flavour and quarkonium production in the LHC era: from proton–proton to heavy-ion collisions, Eur

    A. Andronic et al., Heavy-flavour and quarkonium production in the LHC era: from proton–proton to heavy-ion collisions, Eur. Phys. J. C76, 107 (2016), arXiv:1506.03981 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  12. [12]

    Adamczyk et al

    L. Adamczyk et al. (STAR), Measurements ofD 0 andD ∗ Production inp+pCollisions at √s= 200 GeV, Phys. 8 Rev. D86, 072013 (2012), arXiv:1204.4244 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2012

  13. [13]

    Adamczyk et al

    L. Adamczyk et al. (STAR), Observation ofD 0 Meson Nuclear Modifications in Au+Au Collisions at √sN N= 200 GeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.113, 142301 (2014), [Erratum: Phys.Rev.Lett. 121, 229901 (2018)], arXiv:1404.6185 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  14. [14]

    Adam et al

    J. Adam et al. (STAR), Centrality and transverse mo- mentum dependence ofD 0-meson production at mid- rapidity in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 200 GeV, Phys. Rev. C99, 034908 (2019), arXiv:1812.10224 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  15. [15]

    Adam et al

    J. Adam et al. (STAR), First measurement of Λc baryon production in Au+Au collisions at √sNN = 200 GeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 172301 (2020), arXiv:1910.14628 [nucl-ex]

    arXiv 2020

  16. [16]

    Adams et al

    J. Adams et al. (STAR), Open charm yields in d + Au collisions at s(NN)**(1/2) = 200-GeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 062301 (2005), arXiv:nucl-ex/0407006

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  17. [17]

    Adam et al

    J. Adam et al. (STAR), Observation ofD ± s /D0 enhance- ment in Au+Au collisions at √sN N= 200 GeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 092301 (2021), arXiv:2101.11793 [hep- ex]

    arXiv 2021

  18. [18]

    Adamczyk et al

    L. Adamczyk et al. (STAR), Measurement ofD 0 Az- imuthal Anisotropy at Midrapidity in Au+Au Collisions at √sN N=200 GeV, Phys. Rev. Lett.118, 212301 (2017), arXiv:1701.06060 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  19. [19]

    Seuster et al

    R. Seuster et al. (Belle), Charm hadrons from fragmen- tation and B decays in e+ e- annihilation at s**(1/2) = 10.6-GeV, Phys. Rev. D73, 032002 (2006), arXiv:hep- ex/0506068

    arXiv 2006

  20. [20]

    Aaij et al

    R. Aaij et al. (LHCb), Prompt charm production in pp collisions at sqrt(s)=7 TeV, Nucl. Phys. B871, 1 (2013), arXiv:1302.2864 [hep-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  21. [21]

    Acharya et al

    S. Acharya et al. (ALICE), Λ + c production in Pb-Pb col- lisions at √sNN = 5.02 TeV, Phys. Lett. B793, 212 (2019), arXiv:1809.10922 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  22. [22]

    Acharya et al

    S. Acharya et al. (ALICE), Constraining hadronization mechanisms with Λc+/D0 production ratios in Pb–Pb collisions at sNN=5.02 TeV, Phys. Lett. B839, 137796 (2023), arXiv:2112.08156 [nucl-ex]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  23. [23]

    M. L. Mangano, P. Nason, and G. Ridolfi, Heavy quark correlations in hadron collisions at next-to-leading order, Nucl. Phys. B373, 295 (1992)

    1992

  24. [24]

    B. A. Kniehl, G. Kramer, I. Schienbein, and H. Spies- berger, Inclusive D*+- production in p anti-p collisions with massive charm quarks, Phys. Rev. D71, 014018 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0410289

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  25. [25]

    Helenius and H

    I. Helenius and H. Paukkunen, Revisiting the D-meson hadroproduction in general-mass variable flavour number scheme, JHEP05, 196, arXiv:1804.03557 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  26. [26]

    Cacciari, P

    M. Cacciari, P. Nason, and R. Vogt, QCD predictions for charm and bottom production at RHIC, Phys. Rev. Lett. 95, 122001 (2005), arXiv:hep-ph/0502203

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2005

  27. [27]

    S. K. Das, J.-e. Alam, and P. Mohanty, Dragging Heavy Quarks in Quark Gluon Plasma at the Large Hadron Col- lider, Phys. Rev. C82, 014908 (2010), arXiv:1003.5508 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  28. [28]

    M. He, R. J. Fries, and R. Rapp,D s-Meson as Quan- titative Probe of Diffusion and Hadronization in Nu- clear Collisions, Phys. Rev. Lett.110, 112301 (2013), arXiv:1204.4442 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  29. [29]

    Cao, G.-Y

    S. Cao, G.-Y. Qin, and S. A. Bass, Energy loss, hadronization and hadronic interactions of heavy fla- vors in relativistic heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C92, 024907 (2015), arXiv:1505.01413 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2015

  30. [30]

    T. Lang, H. van Hees, J. Steinheimer, G. Inghirami, and M. Bleicher, Heavy quark transport in heavy ion collisions at energies available at the BNL Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider and at the CERN Large Hadron Col- lider within the UrQMD hybrid model, Phys. Rev. C93, 014901 (2016), arXiv:1211.6912 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  31. [31]

    Fochler, Z

    O. Fochler, Z. Xu, and C. Greiner, Energy loss in a partonic transport model including bremsstrahlung pro- cesses, Phys. Rev. C82, 024907 (2010), arXiv:1003.4380 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2010

  32. [32]

    Djordjevic and M

    M. Djordjevic and M. Djordjevic, LHC jet suppression of light and heavy flavor observables, Phys. Lett. B734, 286 (2014), arXiv:1307.4098 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2014

  33. [33]

    J. Xu, J. Liao, and M. Gyulassy, Bridging Soft-Hard Transport Properties of Quark-Gluon Plasmas with CU- JET3.0, JHEP02, 169, arXiv:1508.00552 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  34. [34]

    T. Song, H. Berrehrah, D. Cabrera, W. Cassing, and E. Bratkovskaya, Charm production in Pb + Pb collisions at energies available at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. C93, 034906 (2016), arXiv:1512.00891 [nucl- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  35. [35]

    S. Cao, T. Luo, G.-Y. Qin, and X.-N. Wang, Linearized Boltzmann transport model for jet propagation in the quark-gluon plasma: Heavy quark evolution, Phys. Rev. C94, 014909 (2016), arXiv:1605.06447 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2016

  36. [36]

    Zhang, L

    C. Zhang, L. Zheng, S. Shi, and Z.-W. Lin, Resolving the RpA and v2 puzzle of D0 mesons in p−Pb colli- sions at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B846, 138219 (2023), arXiv:2210.07767 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2023

  37. [37]

    Zhang, L

    C. Zhang, L. Zheng, S. Shi, and Z.-W. Lin, Investigating D0 meson production in p-Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV with a multi-phase transport model, Eur. Phys. J. C84, 942 (2024), arXiv:2403.06099 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  38. [38]

    Z.-W. Lin, C. M. Ko, B.-A. Li, B. Zhang, and S. Pal, A Multi-phase transport model for relativistic heavy ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C72, 064901 (2005), arXiv:nucl- th/0411110

    arXiv 2005

  39. [39]

    He and Z.-W

    Y. He and Z.-W. Lin, Improved Quark Coalescence for a Multi-Phase Transport Model, Phys. Rev. C96, 014910 (2017), arXiv:1703.02673 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2017

  40. [40]

    Zheng, C

    L. Zheng, C. Zhang, S. S. Shi, and Z. W. Lin, Improve- ment of heavy flavor production in a multiphase trans- port model updated with modern nuclear parton dis- tribution functions, Phys. Rev. C101, 034905 (2020), arXiv:1909.07191 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2020

  41. [41]

    Zhang, L

    C. Zhang, L. Zheng, F. Liu, S. Shi, and Z.-W. Lin, Up- date of a multiphase transport model with modern par- ton distribution functions and nuclear shadowing, Phys. Rev. C99, 064906 (2019), arXiv:1903.03292 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2019

  42. [42]

    Lin and L

    Z.-W. Lin and L. Zheng, Further developments of a multi- phase transport model for relativistic nuclear collisions, Nucl. Sci. Tech.32, 113 (2021), arXiv:2110.02989 [nucl- th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2021

  43. [43]

    Wang and M

    X.-N. Wang and M. Gyulassy, HIJING: A Monte Carlo model for multiple jet production in p p, p A and A A collisions, Phys. Rev. D44, 3501 (1991)

    1991

  44. [44]

    Zhang, ZPC 1.0.1: A Parton cascade for ultrarelativis- tic heavy ion collisions, Comput

    B. Zhang, ZPC 1.0.1: A Parton cascade for ultrarelativis- tic heavy ion collisions, Comput. Phys. Commun.109, 193 (1998), arXiv:nucl-th/9709009

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1998

  45. [45]

    J. W. Cronin, H. J. Frisch, M. J. Shochet, J. P. Boymond, R. Mermod, P. A. Piroue, and R. L. Sumner (E100), Production of hadrons with large transverse momentum at 200, 300, and 400 GeV, Phys. Rev. D11, 3105 (1975)

    1975

  46. [46]

    Accardi, Cronin effect in proton nucleus collisions: 9 A Survey of theoretical models, (2002), arXiv:hep- ph/0212148

    A. Accardi, Cronin effect in proton nucleus collisions: 9 A Survey of theoretical models, (2002), arXiv:hep- ph/0212148

    arXiv 2002

  47. [47]

    Vitev, J

    I. Vitev, J. T. Goldman, M. B. Johnson, and J. W. Qiu, Open charm tomography of cold nuclear matter, Phys. Rev. D74, 054010 (2006), arXiv:hep-ph/0605200

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2006

  48. [48]

    Andersson, G

    B. Andersson, G. Gustafson, G. Ingelman, and T. Sjos- trand, Parton Fragmentation and String Dynamics, Phys. Rept.97, 31 (1983)

    1983

  49. [49]

    Andersson, G

    B. Andersson, G. Gustafson, and B. Soderberg, A Gen- eral Model for Jet Fragmentation, Z. Phys. C20, 317 (1983)

    1983

  50. [50]

    Cacciari and E

    M. Cacciari and E. Gardi, Heavy quark fragmentation, Nucl. Phys. B664, 299 (2003), arXiv:hep-ph/0301047

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2003

  51. [51]

    S. M. Moosavi Nejad and A. Armat, Heavy quark per- turbative QCD fragmentation functions in the presence of hadron mass, Eur. Phys. J. Plus128, 121 (2013), arXiv:1307.6351 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2013

  52. [52]

    Mele and P

    B. Mele and P. Nason, The Fragmentation function for heavy quarks in QCD, Nucl. Phys. B361, 626 (1991), [Erratum: Nucl.Phys.B 921, 841–842 (2017)]

    1991

  53. [53]

    Braaten, K.-m

    E. Braaten, K.-m. Cheung, S. Fleming, and T. C. Yuan, Perturbative QCD fragmentation functions as a model for heavy quark fragmentation, Phys. Rev. D51, 4819 (1995), arXiv:hep-ph/9409316

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 1995

  54. [54]

    Sjostrand, High-energy physics event generation with PYTHIA 5.7 and JETSET 7.4, Comput

    T. Sjostrand, High-energy physics event generation with PYTHIA 5.7 and JETSET 7.4, Comput. Phys. Commun. 82, 74 (1994)

    1994

  55. [55]

    X.-L. Zhao, Y. Zhou, Z.-W. Lin, C. Zhang, and G.-L. Ma, Nuclear cluster structure effect in 16O+16O collisions at the top RHIC energy, (2024), arXiv:2404.09780 [nucl- th]

    arXiv 2024

  56. [56]

    Zhao et al., Hadronization of heavy quarks, Phys

    J. Zhao et al., Hadronization of heavy quarks, Phys. Rev. C109, 054912 (2024), arXiv:2311.10621 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2024

  57. [57]

    R. C. Hwa and C. B. Yang, Recombination of shower partons at high p(T) in heavy ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C70, 024905 (2004), arXiv:nucl-th/0401001

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2004

  58. [58]

    Song and G

    T. Song and G. Coci, Prerequisites for heavy quark co- alescence in heavy-ion collisions, Nucl. Phys. A1028, 122539 (2022), arXiv:2104.10987 [nucl-th]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2022

  59. [59]

    Zhang, X.-Y

    A.-G. Zhang, X.-Y. Peng, X. Peng, and L. Zheng, Explor- ing the multiplicity dependence of the flavor hierarchy for hadron production in high-energy pp collisions, Nucl. Sci. Tech.36, 134 (2025), arXiv:2503.10157 [hep-ph]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv 2025