Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 82 references

Proton-proton Femtoscopy as a Probe of Short-range Structure in High-Energy O+O Collisions

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Proton-proton femtoscopy can resolve sub-femtometer short-range correlations in the 16O wave function, visible as a ~5% shift of the extracted proton source radius in peripheral collisions at 200 GeV.

desk verdict Clean, useful simulation paper that predicts a ~5% pp femtoscopic source-radius shift in peripheral O+O for short-range-correlated 16O, but the causal attribution to the short-range hole rather than one-body size is not fully pinned down. read the letter →

arxiv 2608.01190 v1 pith:65R4OY6Q submitted 2026-08-02 nucl-th nucl-ex

Baoshan Xi , Pei Li , Chunjian Zhang , Jinhui Chen , Su-Ya-La-Tu Zhang , Yu-Gang Ma This is my paper · ORCID
classification nucl-thnucl-ex
keywords proton-protonfemtoscopyshort-rangenucleon-nucleoncorrelations16O+16Ocollisionssourceradiuspionnuclearstructureinitial-stategeometryrelativisticheavy-ion
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

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

The reading

Short-range nucleon-nucleon correlations shape the nuclear many-body wave function but leave no trace in the one-body density, so ordinary size measurements cannot see them. This paper argues that proton-proton femtoscopy can: in simulated 16O+16O collisions at 200 GeV, the low-relative-momentum part of the p-p correlation function responds to the short-distance part of the emitting source, where these correlations live. Comparing a smooth mean-field input, a low-resolution lattice input, and an ab initio input with a short-range repulsive hole, the paper finds that the p-p correlation function separates all three, most sharply in peripheral 60-80% collisions, where the ab initio input lowers the extracted source radius by about 5% relative to the mean-field baseline. Pion-pion correlations respond an order of magnitude more weakly, and a p-p to pion-pion double ratio retains the full effect, locating the sensitivity in the short-distance weighting of the proton pair rather than in an overall source rescaling. The paper also shows that the leading systematic, the choice of the strong-interaction potential, shifts extracted radii by a nearly centrality-independent amount that largely cancels in the ratios under study.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is the 1S0 proton-proton pair wave function, whose large negative scattering length (a_pp ≈ -7.8 fm) makes the low-relative-momentum correlation function controlled by the pair's overlap with the short-distance part of the pair source S(r*) via the Koonin–Pratt convolution C(k*) = ∫ d³r* S(r*) |Ψ(+)(r*,k*)|². The paper combines this with a three-way comparison of initial 16O configurations—a smooth three-parameter Fermi density with no two-nucleon correlations, a low-resolution lattice configuration with a smearing scale near the proton charge radius, and an ab initio configuration with a short-range repulsive hole—and uses the Cpp/Cπ+π+ double ratio to separate short-distance sensitivity from a uniform source rescaling. The centrality dependence of the extracted radius, with the structural signal growing in peripheral collisions, is the mechanism that isolates the short-range effect.

What would settle it

Run the same simulation with a correlation-free 16O configuration whose point-nucleon rms radius is matched to the ab initio input; if the extracted peripheral p-p source radius then falls on the mean-field baseline, the reported 5% suppression is a size effect rather than a short-range-correlation signal.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that the proton-proton correlation function, through the near-threshold 1S0 pair interaction, acts as a short-distance-resolved probe of the nuclear wave function rather than a probe of its second moment. Because the 1S0 wave function has a large negative scattering length, the correlation peak near k* around 20 MeV/c is set by the overlap of the pair wave function with the source at separations below about 2 fm, exactly where the short-range repulsive hole in an ab initio 16O configuration appears. In the paper's transport-model simulation of 16O+16O at 200 GeV, this weighting makes the p-p correlation function distinguish three initial-state inputs, with the ab initio configuration producing an extracted source radius about 5% smaller than the mean-field baseline in peripheral collisions while the low-resolution lattice input stays with the baseline. The same conditions yield a pion-pion response below 0.5%, and the Cpp/Cπ+π+ double ratio keeps the full effect, which the paper reads as evidence that the signal is carried by short-distance weighting of the 1S0 pair. The potential-family systematic, quantified by comparing a phenomenological potential with chiral effective-field-theory potentials, produces a nearly centrality-independent shift of about -0.09 fm in the extracted radius, so relative comparisons across centralities retain the structure signal.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the difference between the ab initio and mean-field inputs is caused by the short-range repulsive hole, not by the accompanying up-to-5% difference in overall nuclear size; the paper's control for this is a low-resolution input with a different size, not a size-matched mean-field configuration.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • Peripheral 60-80% 16O+16O collisions become the recommended window for measuring nuclear-structure signals, since the p-p source-radius separation between the ab initio and mean-field inputs grows to about 5% there.
  • The Cpp/Cπ+π+ double ratio should be used in analyses because it preserves the full short-range signal while cancelling common source-normalization systematics.
  • Relative radius measurements across centralities are largely unaffected by the strong-interaction-potential choice, because the potential-family shift is almost centrality-independent while the structural signal is not.
  • Pion-pion correlations provide a weak but nonzero baseline below 0.5%, which makes them a useful control channel rather than a null check.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If this holds, pp femtoscopy could be used to discriminate among competing ab initio Hamiltonians for light nuclei, since different chiral potentials or many-body methods would imprint different short-range holes on the pair source; the paper does not test that discrimination.
  • The same machinery should transfer to other light nuclei with pronounced cluster or tensor correlations, such as 12C or 20Ne, where the size of the short-range hole differs; this is an extrapolation, not a result of the paper.
  • A direct experimental check would be a centrality-differential measurement of R_pp in O+O collisions at RHIC or the LHC, comparing peripheral and central classes; if the 60-80% class shows a smaller extracted radius per unit multiplicity than the central class after all corrections, the structural origin would be supported.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper proposes proton-proton femtoscopy as a short-distance-resolved probe of initial nuclear structure, applied to 16O+16O collisions at 200 GeV. Using AMPT with string melting, the authors feed three initial 16O configurations into the collision: a mean-field 3pF density, a low-resolution NLEFT cluster input, and a high-resolution VMC ab initio input. They compute pp and pi+pi+ correlation functions with the Lednicky-Lyuboshits model and with CATS using AV18 and Norfolk NV2 potentials, extracting Gaussian and core-resonance source radii. The central claim is that the pp correlation function (and the extracted R_pp) separates all three inputs, most strongly in 60-80% peripheral collisions where the VMC input suppresses the source radius by about 5% relative to 3pF, while pi+pi+ responds by less than 0.5%, and the double ratio C_pp/C_pipi retains the effect. The authors conclude that pp femtoscopy can resolve the ~1 fm short-range repulsive hole in the ab initio 16O wave function, and that the signal survives the ambiguity in the strong-interaction potential because the potential-induced shift is centrality independent while the structural signal is not.

Significance. If the central claim is correct, this is a valuable proposal: it identifies a specific observable (pp correlation in peripheral light-ion collisions) and a specific centrality window where short-range two-nucleon correlations leave a measurable, quantitatively controlled imprint, complementary to flow observables that only constrain low-order moments. The paper has clear strengths: it uses three physics-motivated inputs, two independent correlator frameworks, multiple potentials, and it explicitly quantifies the potential-family systematic. The conclusion is testable with upcoming RHIC/LHC light-ion data, and the proposed double ratio is a practical way to isolate the effect. The computational framework (AMPT plus LL/CATS) is standard and reproducible from the description. The main weakness is that the attribution of the VMC-vs-3pF signal specifically to the short-range repulsive hole is not uniquely established by the controls shown; a matched-size baseline is missing.

major comments (3)
  1. [Results and Discussion, Fig. 2(b) and the paragraph beginning 'Overall nuclear size cannot account for it'] The load-bearing attribution of the ~5% R_pp suppression to the short-range repulsive hole is not adequately isolated from one-body size differences. The only control is NLEFT, which tracks 3pF despite a different rms radius, but NLEFT differs from VMC in many simultaneous ways: a different Hamiltonian, a coarse lattice, 0.84 fm Gaussian smearing, cluster content, and surface profile. The centrality argument that a size difference would be maximal in central collisions is model-dependent: in peripheral events the source is built from few sampled nucleons, so surface and sampling details can amplify one-body differences. A direct test would be a 3pF configuration with the same point-nucleon rms radius as VMC (or, conversely, a VMC-like input with the rms artificially rescaled to 3pF); without it, the reader cannot rule out that the signal is driven by low-order one-body moments, which would make pp femtoscopy a size probe rather than a short-range-correlation probe. This point is central to the paper's title and abstract, so it must be addressed with a matched-rms control or an equivalent decomposition.
  2. [Results and Discussion, Fig. 1(c) and the double-ratio argument] The claim that the survival of the double ratio C_pp/C_pi+pi+ rules out an overall rescaling of the source is not demonstrated quantitatively. The text says 'Had the p-p signal originated in a uniform rescaling of the source, the double ratio would have been strongly reduced,' but no explicit rescaling test is shown. A uniform source rescaling would also rescale the pion source, and the double ratio could in principle remain finite if the pp and pipi channels have different sensitivity to the same radius change. To make the argument load-bearing, the authors should construct a concrete 'uniform rescaling' scenario (e.g., scaling the freeze-out source by ±5% for both channels) and show the resulting double-ratio behavior, or alternatively state the functional dependence of C_pp and C_pipi on the source radius and derive the expected double-ratio change.
  3. [Figure 2(a) and the potential-systematic cancellation] The claim that the potential-family systematic cancels in the ratios on which the conclusions rest is supported only by showing R_NV2/R_AV18 for the 3pF configuration (lower panel of Fig. 2(a)). To justify the cancellation for VMC and NLEFT, the same ratio must be shown for all three configurations and all centralities. If the NV2/AV18 ratio differs between configurations (e.g., because the source radius is smaller for VMC, so the potential sensitivity could differ), then the structural ratio R_VMC/R_3pF would be contaminated by the potential choice. The statement that the offset is 'nearly independent of centrality' is not enough; it must be independent of the configuration as well. This is a required quantitative control for the central 'survives the leading theoretical systematic' claim.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Figure 1(d) and surrounding text] The text says 'two NV2 variants, NV2-I (lpot=106) and NV2-II (lpot=110)' but later refers to 'the four NV2 variants.' Please clarify how many NV2 variants are used, and define the lpot labels (regularization scale? fitting window?) in one place.
  2. [Throughout] There are occasional grammar and typographical errors: 'the p-psystem' should be 'the p-p system'; '3PF' should be '3pF' in the Results section; 'consistent with that the sensitivity is carried by' is missing a word (e.g., 'consistent with the interpretation that'); 'Livia' in reference [32] should be 'Li via'.
  3. [Results and Discussion, Fig. 1(a)-(c)] The lower-panel ratios in Fig. 1 are described as showing deviations that are 'consistent with zero' or '~5%', but no statistical or systematic uncertainties are shown for these ratio curves. Please specify how the uncertainties were estimated (e.g., from event statistics, from the number of pairs) and whether the quoted percentages are central values or 1-sigma bounds.
  4. [Summary and outlook] The sentence 'Consistent with the null result reported for 16O clustering in pion femtoscopy [39]' has a grammatical typo (a comma instead of a period before 'The resulting'). Also, the outlook would benefit from a brief statement of the expected statistical precision at RHIC/LHC to support the claim that the ~5% effect is experimentally resolvable.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the signal is computed from externally supplied wave functions and unfitted observables.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is self-contained in the direction that matters: fixed nuclear-structure inputs (the 3pF parameterization from Ref. [49], VMC coordinates from the external Quantum Monte Carlo work in Refs. [50,51], and NLEFT lattices from Ref. [16]) are fed through AMPT string melting, then through the Koonin–Pratt convolution implemented by LL and CATS, and source radii are extracted by fitting the resulting correlation functions. The target claims—the ~5% VMC/3pF reduction in R_pp in peripheral collisions, the weaker pion response, and the persistence of the effect in the double ratio—are outputs of this pipeline, not inputs. The radii are fit outputs used as comparison metrics, not parameters tuned to reproduce the structural signal. The only same-group citation, Ref. [18], is used as model validation and as prior evidence that ab initio configurations affect flow; the VMC configuration data themselves originate from external QMC publications, and the NLEFT configuration is taken from a distinct lattice-EFT work. The NLEFT control may be open to a correctness objection—it does not match the VMC rms radius, so the attribution of the VMC/3pF difference to the short-range hole is not uniquely isolated—but that is a robustness or control-matching concern, not a circular reduction. No equation is defined in terms of the result it is used to prove, no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no load-bearing conclusion reduces to a self-citation. The paper therefore exhibits no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central comparison rests on standard femtoscopic machinery and externally provided nuclear-structure inputs and potentials. No new parameters are fit to the target observable; the extracted radii are outputs of the comparison. The main assumptions are the fidelity of AMPT and the representativeness of the VMC/NLEFT distributions.

free parameters (3)
  • 3pF density parameters R, a, w = R=2.608 fm, a=0.513 fm, w=-0.051
    Empirical parameters of the mean-field 16O baseline from elastic electron scattering (Ref. [49]); not fitted in this work.
  • NLEFT lattice smearing width = 0.84 fm
    Resolution scale of the low-resolution NLEFT input, taken from Ref. [16]; not fitted here.
  • AMPT partonic cross section = 3.0 mb
    Standard AMPT setting from prior RHIC studies; not fitted here. Controls the amount of rescattering.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Koonin-Pratt relation defines the two-particle correlation function as the convolution of the pair source with the squared two-body wave function (Eq. 2).
    Used as the definition of C(k*) throughout the paper; a standard quantum-mechanical relation in femtoscopy.
  • domain assumption VMC and NLEFT generated coordinate distributions approximate the 16O ground-state wave function.
    The paper takes these configurations from prior ab initio calculations (Refs. [16,18,50-52]); if those distributions are not accurate representations of 16O structure, the comparison loses validity.
  • domain assumption AMPT string melting with sigma=3 mb faithfully propagates initial nucleon positions to the freeze-out source.
    The conclusion that a 5% source-radius shift survives is conditional on the transport model preserving the initial-geometry differences through rescattering and expansion.
  • domain assumption The freeze-out source is well approximated by Gaussian or core-resonance source models.
    Source radii are extracted assuming these two shapes; the paper tests both, but the physical source is not independently measured.
  • domain assumption The strong-interaction potentials AV18, ReidV8, and NV2 are valid descriptions of low-energy proton-proton interactions.
    Used as inputs to the Schrödinger solver; the paper quantifies the spread among them but does not prove their absolute correctness.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Proton-proton Femtoscopy as a Probe of Short-range Structure in High-Energy O+O Collisions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/65R4OY6Q

@misc{pith2026260801190,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Proton-proton Femtoscopy as a Probe of Short-range Structure in High-Energy O+O Collisions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/65R4OY6Q}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2608.01190}
}
abstract

Short-range nucleon-nucleon correlations are a defining feature of the nuclear many-body wave function, yet they are invisible in the one-body density and therefore inaccessible to observables that measure a nuclear size. We show that proton-proton femtoscopy supplies the missing sub-femtometer sensitivity. In $^{16}$O+$^{16}$O collisions at $\rm \sqrt{s_{NN}}=$ 200 GeV, we compare three nuclear-structure inputs spanning mean-field, low-resolution cluster, and short-range-correlated descriptions. The $p$-$p$ correlation function separates all three, most sharply in peripheral collisions, where the \textit{ab initio} input suppresses the extracted source radius by $\sim5\%$ relative to the mean-field baseline. Under identical conditions $\pi^{+}$-$\pi^{+}$ correlations respond an order of magnitude more weakly, and the $C_{pp}/C_{\pi^{+}\pi^{+}}$ double ratio retains the full effect, pointing to the short-distance weighting of the $^{1}S_{0}$ pair rather than to an overall rescaling of the source. The signal survives the leading theoretical systematic, the choice of strong-interaction potential, which we quantify explicitly. These results identify $p$-$p$ femtoscopy as a short-distance-resolved probe of light-nucleus structure, complementary to flow observables that constrain only the low-order moments of the initial geometry.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2608.01190 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (a) Proton-proton correlation functions of O+O collisions of 0-20% (upper panel) and 60%-80% (middle panel) for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (a) Upper panel: the source radii are extracted for three cases under the AV18 potential using both Gaussian and [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p005_2.png] view at source ↗

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

82 extracted references · 28 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    O. Hen, G. A. Miller, E. Piasetzky, and L. B. Weinstein, Nucleon-Nucleon Correlations, Short-lived Excitations, and the Quarks Within, Rev. Mod. Phys.89, 045002 (2017), arXiv:1611.09748 [nucl-ex]

    arXiv 2017

  2. [2]

    Frankfurt, M

    L. Frankfurt, M. Sargsian, and M. Strikman, Recent ob- servation of short range nucleon correlations in nuclei and their implications for the structure of nuclei and neutron stars, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A23, 2991 (2008), arXiv:0806.4412 [nucl-th]

    arXiv 2008

  3. [3]

    Epelbaum, H.-W

    E. Epelbaum, H.-W. Hammer, and U.-G. Meissner, Mod- ern Theory of Nuclear Forces, Rev. Mod. Phys.81, 1773 (2009), arXiv:0811.1338 [nucl-th]

    arXiv 2009

  4. [4]

    von Oertzen, M

    W. von Oertzen, M. Freer, and Y. Kanada-En’yo, Nu- clear clusters and nuclear molecules, Physics Reports 432, 43 (2006)

    2006

  5. [5]

    Freer, H

    M. Freer, H. Horiuchi, Y. Kanada-En’yo, D. Lee, and U.- G. Meißner, Microscopic clustering in light nuclei, Rev. Mod. Phys.90, 035004 (2018)

    2018

  6. [6]

    Cruz-Torres, D

    R. Cruz-Torres, D. Lonardoni, R. Weiss, N. Barnea, D. W. Higinbotham, E. Piasetzky, A. Schmidt, L. B. We- instein, R. B. Wiringa, and O. Hen, Many-body factor- ization and position–momentum equivalence of nuclear short-range correlations, Nature Phys.17, 306 (2021)

    work page 2021

  7. [7]

    J. E. Lynn, I. Tews, S. Gandolfi, and A. Lovato, Quan- tum Monte Carlo Methods in Nuclear Physics: Recent Advances, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.69, 279 (2019), arXiv:1901.04868 [nucl-th]

    arXiv 2019

  8. [8]

    P. F. Bedaque and U. van Kolck, Effective field theory for few nucleon systems, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.52, 339 (2002), arXiv:nucl-th/0203055

    arXiv 2002

Show all 82 references
  1. [9]

    H. W. Hammer, S. K¨ onig, and U. van Kolck, Nuclear effective field theory: status and perspectives, Rev. Mod. Phys.92, 025004 (2020), arXiv:1906.12122 [nucl-th]

    2020 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Lee, Lattice Effective Field Theory Simulations of Nuclei, Ann

    D. Lee, Lattice Effective Field Theory Simulations of Nuclei, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.75, 109 (2025), arXiv:2501.03303 [nucl-th]

    2025

  3. [11]

    J. P. Delaroche, M. Girod, J. Libert, H. Goutte, S. Hi- laire, S. Peru, N. Pillet, and G. F. Bertsch, Structure of even-even nuclei using a mapped collective Hamiltonian and the D1S Gogny interaction, Phys. Rev. C81, 014303 (2010)

    2010

  4. [12]

    Giacaloneet al., Exploiting Ne20 Isotopes for Preci- sion Characterizations of Collectivity in Small Systems, Phys

    G. Giacaloneet al., Exploiting Ne20 Isotopes for Preci- sion Characterizations of Collectivity in Small Systems, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 012302 (2025), arXiv:2402.05995 [nucl-th]

    2025 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Ollitrault, Anisotropy as a signature of transverse collective flow, Phys

    J.-Y. Ollitrault, Anisotropy as a signature of transverse collective flow, Phys. Rev. D46, 229 (1992)

    1992

  6. [14]

    H. Song, Y. Zhou, and K. Gajdosova, Collective flow and hydrodynamics in large and small systems at the LHC, Nucl. Sci. Tech.28, 99 (2017), arXiv:1703.00670 [nucl- th]

    2017 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Shen and L

    C. Shen and L. Yan, Recent development of hydrody- namic modeling in heavy-ion collisions, Nucl. Sci. Tech. 31, 122 (2020), arXiv:2010.12377 [nucl-th]

    2020 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Summerfield, B.-N

    N. Summerfield, B.-N. Lu, C. Plumberg, D. Lee, J. Noronha-Hostler, and A. Timmins, 16O 16O collisions at energies available at the BNL Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider and at the CERN Large Hadron Collider com- 7 paringαclustering versus substructure, Phys. Rev. C 104, L041901 ...

    2021 arXiv

  9. [17]

    P. Li, B. Zhou, and G.-L. Ma, Identifyingα-Cluster Con- figurations in Ne20 via Ultracentral Ne+Ne Collisions, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 082302 (2026), arXiv:2504.04688 [nucl-th]

    2026

  10. [18]

    Zhang, J

    C. Zhang, J. Chen, G. Giacalone, S. Huang, J. Jia, and Y.-G. Ma, Ab-initio nucleon-nucleon correlations and their impact on high energy 16O+16O collisions, Phys. Lett. B862, 139322 (2025), arXiv:2404.08385 [nucl-th]

    2025 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Giacaloneet al., Anisotropic Flow in Fixed- Target Pb208+Ne20 Collisions as a Probe of Quark- Gluon Plasma, Phys

    G. Giacaloneet al., Anisotropic Flow in Fixed- Target Pb208+Ne20 Collisions as a Probe of Quark- Gluon Plasma, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 082301 (2025), arXiv:2405.20210 [nucl-th]

    2025 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Li, K.-J

    P. Li, K.-J. Sun, B. Zhou, and G.-L. Ma, Unmasking short-range correlations via initial-state fluctuations in relativistic heavy-ion collisions, arXiv:2511.23293 [nucl- th] (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  13. [21]

    M. I. Abdulhamidet al.(STAR), Imaging shapes of atomic nuclei in high-energy nuclear collisions, Nature 635, 67 (2024), arXiv:2401.06625 [nucl-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  14. [22]

    E., and others (STAR), Imaging nuclear shape through anisotropic and radial flow in high-energy heavy-ion collisions, Rept

    Aboona, B. E., and others (STAR), Imaging nuclear shape through anisotropic and radial flow in high-energy heavy-ion collisions, Rept. Prog. Phys.88, 108601 (2025), arXiv:2506.17785 [nucl-ex]

    2025

  15. [23]

    Schenke, Violent collisions can reveal hexadecapole deformation of nuclei, Nucl

    B. Schenke, Violent collisions can reveal hexadecapole deformation of nuclei, Nucl. Sci. Tech.35, 115 (2024)

    2024

  16. [24]

    Giacalone, Beyond axial symmetry: high-energy col- lisions unveil the ground-state shape of 238U, Nucl

    G. Giacalone, Beyond axial symmetry: high-energy col- lisions unveil the ground-state shape of 238U, Nucl. Sci. Tech.35, 218 (2024)

    2024

  17. [25]

    Jiaet al., Imaging the initial condition of heavy-ion collisions and nuclear structure across the nuclide chart, Nucl

    J. Jiaet al., Imaging the initial condition of heavy-ion collisions and nuclear structure across the nuclide chart, Nucl. Sci. Tech.35, 220 (2024), arXiv:2209.11042 [nucl- ex]

    2024 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Giacaloneet al., Nuclear Physics Confronts Rela- tivistic Collisions Of Isobars, arXiv:2507.01454 [nucl-ex] (2025)

    G. Giacaloneet al., Nuclear Physics Confronts Rela- tivistic Collisions Of Isobars, arXiv:2507.01454 [nucl-ex] (2025)

    2025 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Duguet, G

    T. Duguet, G. Giacalone, S. Jeon, and A. Tichai, Reveal- ing the Harmonic Structure of Nuclear Two-Body Corre- lations in High-Energy Heavy-Ion Collisions, Phys. Rev. Lett.135, 182301 (2025), arXiv:2504.02481 [nucl-th]

    2025 arXiv

  20. [28]

    M. A. Lisa, S. Pratt, R. Soltz, and U. Wiedemann, Fem- toscopy in relativistic heavy ion collisions, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.55, 357 (2005), arXiv:nucl-ex/0505014

    2005 arXiv

  21. [29]

    U. A. Wiedemann and U. W. Heinz, Particle interferom- etry for relativistic heavy ion collisions, Phys. Rept.319, 145 (1999), arXiv:nucl-th/9901094

    1999 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Lednicky, Correlation femtoscopy, Nucl

    R. Lednicky, Correlation femtoscopy, Nucl. Phys. A774, 189 (2006), arXiv:nucl-th/0510020

    2006 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Ollitrault, Flow systematics from SIS to SPS energies, Nucl

    J.-Y. Ollitrault, Flow systematics from SIS to SPS energies, Nucl. Phys. A638, 195 (1998), arXiv:nucl- ex/9802005

    1998

  24. [32]

    Xi, Z.-Q

    B.-S. Xi, Z.-Q. Zhang, S. Zhang, and Y.-G. Ma, Searching for 4Livia the momentum-correlation function of p− 3He, Phys. Rev. C102, 064901 (2020), arXiv:1909.03157 [nucl-th]

    2020 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Fabbietti, V

    L. Fabbietti, V. Mantovani Sarti, and O. Vazquez Doce, Study of the Strong Interaction Among Hadrons with Correlations at the LHC, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.71, 377 (2021), arXiv:2012.09806 [nucl-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Probing (Hyper)Nuclei Wave Functions and Production Mechanisms in √sNN = 200 GeV Isobar Collisions at RHIC, arXiv:2607.28113 [nucl-ex] (2026)

    2026 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Liu, Y.-W

    M.-Z. Liu, Y.-W. Pan, Z.-W. Liu, T.-W. Wu, J.-X. Lu, and L.-S. Geng, Three ways to decipher the nature of ex- otic hadrons: Multiplets, three-body hadronic molecules, and correlation functions, Phys. Rept.1108, 1 (2025), arXiv:2404.06399 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  28. [36]

    J. He, S. Zhang, Y.-G. Ma, J. Chen, and C. Zhong, Clus- tering structure effect on Hanbury-Brown–Twiss correla- tion in 12C+197Au collisions at 200 GeV, Eur. Phys. J. A56, 52 (2020), arXiv:2002.06058 [nucl-th]

    2020 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Wang, Y.-G

    T.-T. Wang, Y.-G. Ma, and S. Zhang, Simulations of momentum correlation functions of light (anti)nuclei in relativistic heavy-ion collisions at sNN=39 GeV, Phys. Rev. C107, 014911 (2023), arXiv:2301.02846 [hep-ph]

    2023 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Pratt, Pion Interferometry for Exploding Sources, Phys

    S. Pratt, Pion Interferometry for Exploding Sources, Phys. Rev. Lett.53, 1219 (1984)

    1984

  31. [39]

    Kincses, Femtoscopic signatures of unique nuclear structures in relativistic collisions, Phys

    D. Kincses, Femtoscopic signatures of unique nuclear structures in relativistic collisions, Phys. Rev. Res.7, L042028 (2025), arXiv:2506.05849 [nucl-th]

    2025

  32. [40]

    S. E. Koonin, Proton Pictures of High-Energy Nuclear Collisions, Phys. Lett. B70, 43 (1977)

    1977

  33. [41]

    Sinyukov, R

    Y. Sinyukov, R. Lednicky, S. V. Akkelin, J. Pluta, and B. Erazmus, Coulomb corrections for interferome- try analysis of expanding hadron systems, Phys. Lett. B 432, 248 (1998)

    1998

  34. [42]

    V. G. J. Stoks, R. A. M. Klomp, M. C. M. Rentmeester, and J. J. de Swart, Partial wave analaysis of all nucleon- nucleon scattering data below 350-MeV, Phys. Rev. C 48, 792 (1993)

    1993

  35. [43]

    Tolos and L

    L. Tolos and L. Fabbietti, Strangeness in Nuclei and Neu- tron Stars, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.112, 103770 (2020), arXiv:2002.09223 [nucl-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Adamczyk, J

    L. Adamczyk, J. K. Adkins, G. Agakishiev,et al. (STAR), Measurement of Interaction between Antipro- tons, Nature527, 345 (2015)

    2015

  37. [45]

    Y. J. Wanget al.(SπRIT), Large amplification of the isospin-dependence of proton emitting source size in ra- dioactive heavy-ion collisions: a signal of n-p correlation, arXiv:2604.25107 [nucl-ex] (2026)

    2026 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Shen, B.-S

    L. Shen, B.-S. Huang, and Y.-G. Ma, Short-range correlations in the extended quantum molecular dy- namics model, Phys. Rev. C105, 014603 (2022), arXiv:2112.10348 [nucl-th]

    2022 arXiv

  39. [47]

    Epelbaum, S

    E. Epelbaum, S. Heihoff, U.-G. Meißner, and A. Tscher- won, Can the Strong Interactions between Hadrons Be Determined Using Femtoscopy?, Phys. Rev. Lett.136, 212301 (2026), arXiv:2504.08631 [nucl-th]

    2026 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Siet al., Extracting Neutron-Neutron Interaction Strength and Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Neutron Emission from the Two-Particle Correlation Function, Phys

    D. Siet al., Extracting Neutron-Neutron Interaction Strength and Spatiotemporal Dynamics of Neutron Emission from the Two-Particle Correlation Function, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 222301 (2025), arXiv:2501.09576 [nucl-ex]

    2025 arXiv

  41. [49]

    De Vries, C

    H. De Vries, C. W. De Jager, and C. De Vries, Nuclear charge and magnetization density distribution parame- ters from elastic electron scattering, Atom. Data Nucl. Data Tabl.36, 495 (1987)

    1987

  42. [50]

    Lonardoni, S

    D. Lonardoni, S. Gandolfi, J. E. Lynn, C. Petrie, J. Carl- son, K. E. Schmidt, and A. Schwenk, Auxiliary field diffu- sion Monte Carlo calculations of light and medium-mass nuclei with local chiral interactions, Phys. Rev. C97, 044318 (2018), arXiv:1802.08932 [nucl-th]

    2018 arXiv

  43. [51]

    S. H. Lim, J. Carlson, C. Loizides, D. Lonardoni, J. E. Lynn, J. L. Nagle, J. D. Orjuela Koop, and J. Ouellette, Exploring New Small System Geometries in Heavy Ion Collisions, Phys. Rev. C99, 044904 (2019), 8 arXiv:1812.08096 [nucl-th]

    2019 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Elhatisari, E

    S. Elhatisari, E. Epelbaum, H. Krebs, T. A. L¨ ahde, D. Lee, N. Li, B.-n. Lu, U.-G. Meißner, and G. Rupak, Ab initio calculations of the isotopic dependence of nu- clear clustering, Phys. Rev. Lett.119, 222505 (2017)

    2017

  45. [53]

    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

    2005

  46. [54]

    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]

    2021 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Giacalone, J

    G. Giacalone, J. Jia, and C. Zhang, Impact of nuclear de- formation on relativistic heavy-ion collisions: Assessing consistency in nuclear physics across energy scales, Phys. Rev. Lett.127, 242301 (2021)

    2021

  48. [56]

    J. Jia, G. Giacalone, and C. Zhang, Separating the im- pact of nuclear skin and nuclear deformation in high- energy isobar collisions, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 022301 (2023)

    2023

  49. [57]

    Zhang and J

    C. Zhang and J. Jia, Evidence of quadrupole and oc- tupole deformations in 96Zr +96 Zr and 96Ru +96 Ru col- lisions at ultrarelativistic energies, Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 022301 (2022)

    2022

  50. [58]

    Zhao, Z.-W

    X.-L. Zhao, Z.-W. Lin, Y. Zhou, C. Zhang, and G.-L. Ma, Nuclear cluster structure effect in 16O+16O collisions at the top RHIC energy, Phys. Lett. B874, 140254 (2026), arXiv:2404.09780 [nucl-th]

    2026

  51. [59]

    Engineering the shapes of quark-gluon plasma droplets by comparing anisotropic flow in small symmetric and asymmetric collision systems, arXiv:2510.19645 [nucl-ex] (2025)

    2025

  52. [60]

    Lednicky and V

    R. Lednicky and V. L. Lyuboshits, Final State Inter- action Effect on Pairing Correlations Between Particles with Small Relative Momenta, Yad. Fiz.35, 1316 (1981)

    1981

  53. [61]

    Lednicky, Finite-size effects on two-particle produc- tion in continuous and discrete spectrum, Phys

    R. Lednicky, Finite-size effects on two-particle produc- tion in continuous and discrete spectrum, Phys. Part. Nucl.40, 307 (2009)

    2009

  54. [62]

    Lednicky, V

    R. Lednicky, V. Lyuboshitz, K. Mikhailov, Y. Sinyukov, A. Stavinsky, and B. Erazmus, Multiboson effects in mul- tiparticle production, Phys. Rev. C61, 034901 (2000)

    2000

  55. [63]

    Lednicky, Notes on correlation femtoscopy, Phys

    R. Lednicky, Notes on correlation femtoscopy, Phys. Atom. Nucl.71, 1572 (2008)

    2008

  56. [64]

    Lednicky, P

    R. Lednicky, P. Chaloupka, and M. Sumbera, Fem- toscopic correlations and narrow resonance formation, Prog. Theor. Phys. Suppl.193, 335 (2012)

    2012

  57. [65]

    Adamczyket al.(STAR), ΛΛ Correlation Function in Au+Au collisions at√sNN = 200 GeV, Phys

    L. Adamczyket al.(STAR), ΛΛ Correlation Function in Au+Au collisions at√sNN = 200 GeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 022301 (2015), arXiv:1408.4360 [nucl-ex]

    2015 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Chen, F.-K

    J.-H. Chen, F.-K. Guo, Y.-G. Ma, C.-P. Shen, Q.-Y. Shou, Q. Wang, J.-J. Wu, and B.-S. Zou, Production of exotic hadrons in pp and nuclear collisions, Nucl. Sci. Tech.36, 55 (2025), arXiv:2411.18257 [hep-ph]

    2025 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Wang, Y.-G

    T.-T. Wang, Y.-G. Ma, and S. Zhang, Calculation of momentum correlation functions betweenπ, K, and p for several heavy-ion collision systems at sNN=39 GeV, Phys. Rev. C109, 024912 (2024)

    2024

  60. [68]

    Xi, J.-H

    B.-S. Xi, J.-H. Chen, L. Ma, Y.-G. Ma, and T.-T. Wang, Study of the momentum correlation of nucleons in 96 44Ru + 96 44Ru and 96 40Zr + 96 40Zr collisions at √sNN = 7.7 and 200 GeV from a multiphase transport model, Nucl. Sci. Tech.36, 228 (2025)

    2025

  61. [69]

    D. L. Mihaylov, V. Mantovani Sarti, O. W. Arnold, L. Fabbietti, B. Hohlweger, and A. M. Mathis, A fem- toscopic Correlation Analysis Tool using the Schr¨ odinger equation (CATS), Eur. Phys. J. C78, 394 (2018), arXiv:1802.08481 [hep-ph]

    2018 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Acharyaet al.(ALICE), p-p, p-Λ and Λ-Λ correlations studied via femtoscopy in pp reactions at √s= 7 TeV, Phys

    S. Acharyaet al.(ALICE), p-p, p-Λ and Λ-Λ correlations studied via femtoscopy in pp reactions at √s= 7 TeV, Phys. Rev. C99, 024001 (2019), arXiv:1805.12455 [nucl- ex]

    2019 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Acharyaet al.(ALICE), First Observation of an Attractive Interaction between a Proton and a Cas- cade Baryon, Phys

    S. Acharyaet al.(ALICE), First Observation of an Attractive Interaction between a Proton and a Cas- cade Baryon, Phys. Rev. Lett.123, 112002 (2019), arXiv:1904.12198 [nucl-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Acharyaet al.(ALICE), Scattering studies with low- energy kaon-proton femtoscopy in proton-proton colli- sions at the LHC, Phys

    S. Acharyaet al.(ALICE), Scattering studies with low- energy kaon-proton femtoscopy in proton-proton colli- sions at the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett.124, 092301 (2020), arXiv:1905.13470 [nucl-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Collaborationet al.(ALICE), Unveiling the strong interaction among hadrons at the LHC, Nature588, 232 (2020), [Erratum: Nature 590, E13 (2021)], arXiv:2005.11495 [nucl-ex]

    A. Collaborationet al.(ALICE), Unveiling the strong interaction among hadrons at the LHC, Nature588, 232 (2020), [Erratum: Nature 590, E13 (2021)], arXiv:2005.11495 [nucl-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Acharyaet al.(ALICE), Observation of deuteron and antideuteron formation from resonance-decay nucleons, Nature648, 306 (2025), arXiv:2504.02393 [nucl-ex]

    S. Acharyaet al.(ALICE), Observation of deuteron and antideuteron formation from resonance-decay nucleons, Nature648, 306 (2025), arXiv:2504.02393 [nucl-ex]

    2025

  67. [75]

    D. H. Boal, C. K. Gelbke, and B. K. Jennings, Intensity interferometry in subatomic physics, Rev. Mod. Phys.62, 553 (1990)

    1990

  68. [76]

    Pratt, T

    S. Pratt, T. Csorgo, and J. Zimanyi, Detailed predictions for two pion correlations in ultrarelativistic heavy ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C42, 2646 (1990)

    1990

  69. [77]

    Acharyaet al.(ALICE), Femtoscopic study of the proton-proton and proton-deuteron systems in heavy-ion collisions at the LHC, Phys

    S. Acharyaet al.(ALICE), Femtoscopic study of the proton-proton and proton-deuteron systems in heavy-ion collisions at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B871, 139921 (2025), arXiv:2505.01061 [nucl-ex]

    2025

  70. [78]

    R. B. Wiringa, V. G. J. Stoks, and R. Schiavilla, An Accurate nucleon-nucleon potential with charge indepen- dence breaking, Phys. Rev. C51, 38 (1995), arXiv:nucl- th/9408016

    1995

  71. [79]

    R. V. Reid, Jr., Local phenomenological nucleon-nucleon potentials, Annals Phys.50, 411 (1968)

    1968

  72. [80]

    Piarulli, L

    M. Piarulli, L. Girlanda, R. Schiavilla, A. Kievsky, A. Lo- vato, L. E. Marcucci, S. C. Pieper, M. Viviani, and R. B. Wiringa, Local chiral potentials with ∆-intermediate states and the structure of light nuclei, Phys. Rev. C 94, 054007 (2016), arXiv:1606.06335 [nucl-th]

    2016 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Acharyaet al.(ALICE), Search for a common baryon source in high-multiplicity pp collisions at the LHC, Phys

    S. Acharyaet al.(ALICE), Search for a common baryon source in high-multiplicity pp collisions at the LHC, Phys. Lett. B811, 135849 (2020), [Erratum: Phys.Lett.B 861, 139233 (2025)], arXiv:2004.08018 [nucl-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Becattini, P

    F. Becattini, P. Castorina, A. Milov, and H. Satz, Predic- tions of hadron abundances in pp collisions at the LHC, J. Phys. G38, 025002 (2011), arXiv:0912.2855 [hep-ph]

    2011 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.