Jet-like dihadron correlations in OO and Ne--Ne collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 5.36$ TeV with ALICE

Joonsuk Bae (on behalf of the ALICE Collaboration); Neelkamal Mallick

REVIEW

Jet-like dihadron correlations in OO and Ne--Ne collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 5.36$ TeV with ALICE

Neelkamal Mallick, Joonsuk Bae (on behalf of the ALICE Collaboration)

Nuclear Experiment · Submitted 26 Oct 2026 · 33 references

Pith's verdict: First OO/Ne–Ne I_AA data are worth having, but the only interpretive claim rides on a 1.4σ deviation that the authors' own cited no-quenching baseline could explain.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (deepseek/deepseek-v4-flash) read the paper on October 27, 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 →

· 2 major objections · 7 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv ID2610.35331 (version 1)

Pith IDG37E7BV7, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

CitationJoonsuk Bae (on behalf of the ALICE Collaboration), Neelkamal Mallick. "Jet-like dihadron correlations in OO and Ne--Ne collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 5.36$ TeV with ALICE." arXiv:2610.35331 (2026). https://pith.science/paper/G37E7BV7

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

This is a short ALICE proceedings note reporting genuinely first I_AA measurements: near and away side in OO, near side in Ne–Ne, at 5.36 TeV against a same-energy minimum-bias pp reference. That alone makes it a useful cross-system benchmark for small-system energy-loss models. The analysis is careful for a proceedings: Barlow-criterion systematics, mixed-event correction, and a cross-check of near-side yields from the dEta and dPhi projections. The authors also do the right thing by not repeating the near-side width study already published as ref [21] and by flagging explicitly that event-selection biases and cold-nuclear-matter effects are not addressed [b22, b48]. Credit where due: the paper is honest about what it does and does not settle.

The soft spot is the one the authors themselves signpost. The only physically interesting statement — away-side I_AA below unity in 0–5% OO — sits on a 1.4σ deviation in a single bin (8 < pT,trig < 15 x 4 < pT,assoc < 6 GeV/c). Their own cited refs [22] and [23] are a titled no-quenching baseline for OO and a quantitative selection-bias study showing that high-pT yields and correlations move away from unity without parton energy loss. The paper neither subtracts nor quantifies that baseline. So the data are fully compatible with the no-quenching hypothesis and with jet–medium interactions; "qualitatively consistent with" is accurate as a description, but the suppression is not established. If this becomes a journal paper rather than a proceedings note, the authors should show I_AA against the [22] baseline prediction and, where possible, in event classes with smaller selection effects. The Pb–Pb comparison at 2.76 TeV also carries an unquantified energy mismatch; probably minor here, but worth a caveat.

The citation pattern is fine. Self-citation to ALICE analyses is appropriate, and including the no-quenching references is more than many such notes do. Absence of data tables and code is normal for preliminary proceedings and I would not count it against the physics.

Bottom line: as a first data point with an honest hedge, this deserves a serious referee and publication as preliminary proceedings. As evidence for jet quenching in OO, it does not move the needle yet. I would read it at a journal club alongside ref [22], and I would cite it only with the caveat that the interpretation is underdetermined.

Referee report

Significance

The measurement is a legitimate first data point in an unexplored corner of the system-size landscape: it is the first I_AA in OO collisions at the LHC and the first near-side I_AA in Ne–Ne, in a system class that sits between the 'no clear evidence' regime of pp/p–Pb and the strongly quenched Pb–Pb regime. Procedural strengths deserve explicit credit: the I_AA ratio uses an external minimum-bias pp anchor at the same nucleon–nucleon energy and is therefore not fitted; the systematic handling with the Barlow criterion is conservative; the near-side result is cross-checked between the Delta-eta and Delta-phi projections; and the authors explicitly flag the two confounds (selection bias and cold-nuclear-matter effects, refs [22,23]) that any quenching interpretation must face. The value of the paper is the measurement plus an honest statement of its ambiguity; its interpretive content is modest and, as discussed below, needs a wording correction to match its statistical weight.

Major objections (2)

[Section 3–4 and abstract] The interpretive claim 'The observation of high-pT yield suppression via away-side I_AA<1 in OO collisions is qualitatively consistent with jet–medium interactions' (Section 4; abstract) rests on a single 1.4-sigma deviation in one bin (8 < pT,trig < 15 x 4 < pT,assoc < 6 GeV/c at 0–5%). The paper's own refs [22] and [23] are quantitative no-quenching baselines that can move I_AA below unity in OO through event-selection bias and cold-nuclear-matter effects, and the paper neither states nor bounds their predicted magnitude in exactly this bin. As written, the data are equally compatible with the quenching and no-quenching hypotheses, and the summary sentence overstates the discriminating power of the measurement. I recommend rewording to state explicitly that the away-side deviation is statistically weak (1.4 sigma) and is consistent both with jet–medium interactions and with the refs [22,23] baselines; if a one-sentence quantitative comparison of the [22,23] baseline with the measured deviation in this bin can be added without new analysis, it would materially strengthen the contribution. The authors acknowledge this: “Insmallsystems,however,cold-nuclear-mattereffectsandbiasesrelated totheevent-activityselectioncanalsomove𝐼 AAawayfromunity[22,23],soacarefulinterpretation is required.”
[Section 2, ZYAM pedestal] The away-side yield, which carries the only novel interpretive content, is extracted from the Delta-phi projection after subtracting a ZYAM pedestal plus a v2,v3 flow term. ZYAM is known to over-subtract the background when the away-side jet contributes near the correlation minimum, i.e., precisely when the away-side is broad and suppressed as in central collisions; this bias direction coincides with the claimed I_AA < 1. The systematic variation of the pedestal with Barlow filtering covers part of this sensitivity, but the paper does not report how large the pedestal-induced spread in the away-side I_AA is relative to the 1.4-sigma deviation, nor whether the ZYAM minimum assumption was tested in central OO. Note that the near-side cross-check between the Delta-eta and Delta-phi projections does not constrain this, because the away-side exists only in the Delta-phi projection. Please add a sentence quantifying the pedestal sensitivity of the away-side bin that drives the conclusion.

Minor objections (7)

[Section 3] Specify whether the quoted 1.4-sigma deviation is statistical only, systematic only, or statistical and systematic combined in quadrature; the text is ambiguous on this point.
[Section 2] The flow term P(Delta-phi) includes only v2 and v3; higher-order harmonics, notably v4, can contribute to the long-range background at a level comparable to the claimed deviation, so state the check used or the reason these are negligible.
[Figures 1–2] The captions do not state whether the error bars include systematic uncertainties, and the results are shown only graphically; a small table of the I_AA values with total uncertainties for the quoted bins (especially the 8–15 x 4–6 GeV/c away-side point) would let the reader verify the 1.4-sigma statement.
[Abstract and Section 1] The multiplicity-dependent width modification is presented in the abstract as a result of this contribution, but Section 1 states these results are already reported in Ref. [21] and are not repeated; the abstract should attribute the width results to Ref. [21] so the new versus previously-reported split is clear to the reader.
[Section 3] The Pb–Pb comparison uses I_AA at sqrt(s_NN) = 2.76 TeV while the OO and Ne–Ne data are at 5.36 TeV; add one sentence noting that part of the magnitude difference relative to central Pb–Pb could in principle reflect the energy dependence of I_AA rather than system size alone.
[Section 2 and figures] The event counts or integrated luminosities for the OO, Ne–Ne, and pp samples are not reported; including them would let the reader assess the statistical reach behind a 1.4-sigma single-bin statement.
[References] References [16], [17], [21], and [23] are arXiv preprints or conference contributions; please add their current publication status (journal reference, 'in preparation', or proceedings) so that the introduction's use of [16,17] as evidence for suppression is unambiguous.

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

The paper

The paper claims

Central OO collisions show an away-side jet-yield suppression below the pp baseline, consistent with jet–medium interaction but weaker than Pb–Pb.

The reading

This paper tries to establish what jet-like two-particle correlations reveal in the smallest nucleus-nucleus systems at the LHC, reporting the first $I_{\rm AA}$ measurement in oxygen-oxygen (OO) collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=5.36$ TeV. In 0-5% central OO events the away-side per-trigger associated yield drops below the minimum-bias pp reference, with a 1.4$\sigma$ deficit in the $8

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is $I_{\rm AA}$, the per-trigger normalized relative yield: the ratio of the near-side or away-side associated yield in an AA system to the same yield in minimum-bias pp collisions, computed from the azimuthal projection of a mixed-event corrected same-event correlation function. The zero-yield-at-minimum pedestal and the long-range anisotropic-flow component are subtracted with a low-multiplicity template fit, so what remains is treated as the jet-like part of the correlation. $I_{\rm AA}$ carries the argument because away-side values below unity are the proposed signature of medium-modified fragmentation, while the rise at low $p_{\rm T}$ on both sides is the proposed signature of soft-fragment redistribution.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that OO collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=5.36$ TeV show the first hint of jet-medium modification in the per-trigger relative yield $I_{\rm AA}$: the away-side yield falls below unity relative to pp in central events, the low-$p_{\rm T}$ yield is enhanced on both sides, and the pattern is weaker than the corresponding Pb-Pb suppression. The paper treats this as qualitatively consistent with jet-medium interactions, not as a definitive observation, and it explicitly leaves open the possibility that event-selection biases or cold-nuclear-matter effects contribute. On the near side, 0-5% OO is compatible with 60-90% peripheral Pb-Pb in matched $p_{\rm T}$ bins, while central Pb-Pb shows both a stronger low-$p_{\rm T}$ enhancement and a stronger high-$p_{\rm T}$ away-side suppression.

Load-bearing premise

The interpretation of the away-side $I_{\rm AA}<1$ as a jet-medium effect assumes that event-selection biases and cold-nuclear-matter effects do not dominate the 1.4$\sigma$ deficit, and this analysis does not subtract or quantify those contributions.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The OO $I_{\rm AA}$ points become a benchmark that parton energy-loss models must reproduce: the same models have to give near-side yields matching peripheral Pb-Pb while keeping away-side suppression weaker than central Pb-Pb.
The low-$p_{\rm T}$ enhancement on both sides, combined with the previously reported near-side peak broadening, constrains how much jet energy is redistributed to soft fragments in small collision systems.
A higher-statistics run, or reconstructed-jet measurements in the same systems, would determine whether the 1.4$\sigma$ away-side deficit grows into a decisive signal or reverts toward unity after bias corrections.
If the interpretation holds, OO would be the smallest collision system at the LHC with a jet-medium-like correlation signature, narrowing the size range in which quark-gluon-plasma-like behavior must be explained.

Reading between the lines

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

Editorial inference: the comparison to Pb-Pb uses data at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=2.76$ TeV, while OO and Ne-Ne are at 5.36 TeV, so part of the difference in magnitude could reflect the energy dependence of the pp reference rather than system size.
Editorial inference: because 0-5% centrality is selected by forward multiplicity, the sample could be biased toward events with early hard activity; applying the selection-bias corrections the paper cites directly to these $p_{\rm T}$ bins would show whether the 1.4$\sigma$ deficit survives.
Editorial inference: the unmeasured Ne-Ne away side is a testable prediction of the paper's reading; if the OO suppression is a genuine medium effect, Ne-Ne away-side $I_{\rm AA}$ should show a similar or intermediate suppression once statistics allow it.
Editorial inference: the near-side peak broadening and the low-$p_{\rm T}$ $I_{\rm AA}$ enhancement may be two views of the same soft-fragment redistribution, a connection that bin-by-bin correlation of the two observables could test.

Original abstract

Heavy-ion collisions are primarily studied to investigate the properties of hot and dense primordial nuclear matter, known as the quark--gluon plasma (QGP). However, recent observations of hydrodynamic flow--like behavior in pp and p--Pb collisions at the LHC suggest the possible formation of QGP droplets even in the smallest collision systems. To bridge the multiplicity gap between small and large systems and to examine the applicability of hydrodynamic descriptions, light-ion collisions have been studied for the first time at the LHC. This contribution presents dihadron correlation measurements in OO and Ne--Ne collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 5.36$ TeV recorded with ALICE to explore possible medium effects. The width of the near-side correlation peak has been studied as a function of charged-particle multiplicity at midrapidity, showing a multiplicity-dependent modification of the widths in various transverse momentum ($p_{\rm T}$) intervals in OO and Ne--Ne collisions relative to pp and pO collisions. Further, the per-trigger normalized relative yields of near-side and away-side correlations, $I_{\rm AA}$, are measured in OO collisions for the first time, while in Ne--Ne collisions, the measurement is performed for the near side only. The observed suppression of the away-side associated yield in OO collisions relative to pp collisions is qualitatively consistent with jet--medium interactions, albeit with a weaker magnitude than in central Pb--Pb. However, the extent to which other effects, such as event-selection biases and cold-nuclear-matter effects, contribute to the observed suppression in the present kinematic regime remains an open question.

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, 2026-10-27: 1 request, 6,594 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.87 · states limitation 0.95 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.92 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.13 · compares with prior results 0.96 · 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.

Heavy-ion collisions are primarily studied to investigate the properties of hot and dense primordial nuclear matter, known as the quark--gluon plasma (QGP). However, recent observations of hydrodynamic flow--like behavior in pp and p--Pb collisions at the LHC suggest the possible formation of QGP droplets even in the smallest collision systems. To bridge the multiplicity gap between small and large systems and to examine the applicability of hydrodynamic descriptions, light-ion collisions have been studied for the first time at the LHC. This contribution presents dihadron correlation measurements in OO and Ne--Ne collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 5.36$ TeV recorded with ALICE to explore possible medium effects. The width of the near-side correlation peak has been studied as a function of charged-particle multiplicity at midrapidity, showing a multiplicity-dependent modification of the widths in various transverse momentum ($p_{\rm T}$) intervals in OO and Ne--Ne collisions relative to pp and pO collisions. Further, the per-trigger normalized relative yields of near-side and away-side correlations, $I_{\rm AA}$, are measured in OO collisions for the first time, while in Ne--Ne collisions, the measurement is performed for the near side only. The observed suppression of the away-side associated yield in OO collisions relative to pp collisions is qualitatively consistent with jet--medium interactions, albeit with a weaker magnitude than in central Pb--Pb. However, the extent to which other effects, such as event-selection biases and cold-nuclear-matter effects, contribute to the observed suppression in the present kinematic regime remains an open question.

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	Heavy-ion collisions are primarily studied to investigate the properties of hot and dense primordial nuclear matter, known as the quark--gluon plasma (QGP).	background 1.00	0.04	0.02	asserted 1.00
s1	However, recent observations of hydrodynamic flow--like behavior in pp and p--Pb collisions at the LHC suggest the possible formation of QGP droplets even in the smallest collision systems.	background 0.98	0.05	0.03	hedged possibility 0.99
s2	To bridge the multiplicity gap between small and large systems and to examine the applicability of hydrodynamic descriptions, light-ion collisions have been studied for the first time at the LHC.	gap 0.51	0.22	0.03	asserted 0.99
s3	This contribution presents dihadron correlation measurements in OO and Ne--Ne collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 5.36$ TeV recorded with ALICE to explore possible medium effects.	contribution 1.00	0.92	0.06	asserted 0.97
s4	The width of the near-side correlation peak has been studied as a function of charged-particle multiplicity at midrapidity, showing a multiplicity-dependent modification of the widths in various transverse momentum ($p_{\rm T}$) intervals in OO and Ne--Ne collisions relative to pp and pO collisions.	result 0.99	0.95	0.18	asserted 1.00
s5	Further, the per-trigger normalized relative yields of near-side and away-side correlations, $I_{\rm AA}$, are measured in OO collisions for the first time, while in Ne--Ne collisions, the measurement is performed for the near side only.	contribution 0.75	0.97	0.08	asserted 1.00
s6	The observed suppression of the away-side associated yield in OO collisions relative to pp collisions is qualitatively consistent with jet--medium interactions, albeit with a weaker magnitude than in central Pb--Pb.	interpretation 0.77	0.92	0.43	hedged possibility 0.99
s7	However, the extent to which other effects, such as event-selection biases and cold-nuclear-matter effects, contribute to the observed suppression in the present kinematic regime remains an open question.	limitation 0.87	0.26	0.11	hedged possibility 0.44

What kind of paper the classifier reports this is: empirical study 1.00 · evidence from observation or experiment 0.87.

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.** Near-side and away-side 𝐼AA as a function of 𝑝T, assoc in 0–5% central OO collisions at √ 𝑠NN = 5.36 TeV, for trigger intervals 6 < 𝑝T, trig < 8 GeV/𝑐 (left) and 8 < 𝑝T, trig < 15 GeV/𝑐 (right). Near-side yields are obtained from both Δ𝜂 and Δ𝜑 projections. ALI-PREL-635754 ALI-PREL-635765

**Figure 2.** Near-side (left) and away-side (right) 𝐼AA as a function of associated-particle transverse momentum 𝑝T, assoc in central OO and Ne–Ne collisions at √ 𝑠NN = 5.36 TeV, compared with Pb–Pb measurements at √ 𝑠NN = 2.76 TeV. Trigger particles are selected in 8 < 𝑝T, trig < 15 GeV/𝑐. 4. Summary The measured 𝐼AA in light-ion collisions shows a low-𝑝T enhancement and, a decreasing trend on both the near and away sides at higher 𝑝T. The observation of high-𝑝T yield suppression via away-side 𝐼AA < 1 in OO collisions is qualitatively consistent with jet–medium interactions, albeit with a weaker

Figures reproduced from arXiv:2610.35331 by the authors.

References

Works cited (33)

[21]

S.PrasadfortheALICECollaboration,Jet-likedi-hadroncorrelationsinpO,OO,andNe–Ne collisions,arXiv:2609.24237 [nucl-ex]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[22]

J.Gebhard,A.MazeliauskasandA.Takacs,No-quenchingbaselineforenergylosssignalsin oxygen-oxygen collisions,JHEP04(2025) 034 [arXiv:2410.22405 [hep-ph]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025
[23]

J.Park,J.L.Nagle,D.V.Perepelitsa,S.LimandC.Loizides,Selection-biaseffectsonhigh-𝑝 T yield and correlation measurements in oxygen + oxygen collisions,Phys. Rev. C112(2025) 064916 [arXiv:2507.03603 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith arXiv 2025
[1]

W.Busza,K.RajagopalandW.vanderSchee,HeavyIonCollisions: TheBigPicture,andthe Big Questions,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.68(2018) 339 [arXiv:1802.04801 [hep-ph]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018
[2]

J.-Y.Ollitrault,Anisotropyasasignatureoftransversecollectiveflow,Phys.Rev.D46(1992) 229

View on Pith 1992
[3]

CMS Collaboration,Observation of Long-Range Near-Side Angular Correlations in Proton- Proton Collisions at the LHC,JHEP09(2010) 091 [arXiv:1009.4122 [hep-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010
[4]

ALICE Collaboration,Long-range angular correlations on the near and away side in𝑝–Pb collisionsat√𝑠NN=5.02TeV,Phys.Lett.B719(2013)29[arXiv:1212.2001 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013
[5]

PHENIX Collaboration,Creation of quark–gluon plasma droplets with three distinct geome- tries,Nature Phys.15(2019) 214 [arXiv:1805.02973 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith arXiv 2019
[6]

J. L. Nagle and W. A. Zajc,Small System Collectivity in Relativistic Hadronic and Nuclear Collisions,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.68(2018) 211 [arXiv:1801.03477 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018
[7]

J. Brewer, A. Mazeliauskas and W. van der Schee,Opportunities of OO and𝑝O collisions at the LHC,arXiv:2103.01939 [hep-ph]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[8]

STAR Collaboration,Evidence from𝑑+Au measurements for final-state suppression of high-𝑝 T hadrons in Au+Au collisions at RHIC,Phys. Rev. Lett.91(2003) 072304 [arXiv:nucl-ex/0306024]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003
[9]

ALICE Collaboration,Particle-yield modification in jet-like azimuthal di-hadron corre- lations in Pb–Pb collisions at√𝑠NN =2.76TeV,Phys. Rev. Lett.108(2012) 092301 [arXiv:1110.0121 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012
[10]

ALICECollaboration,Jet-likecorrelationswithneutralpiontriggersinppandcentralPb–Pb collisions at 2.76 TeV,Phys. Lett. B763(2016) 238 [arXiv:1608.07201 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016
[11]

CMSCollaboration,Decomposingtransversemomentumbalancecontributionsforquenched jets in PbPb collisions at√𝑠NN =2.76TeV,JHEP11(2016) 055 [arXiv:1609.02466 [nucl-ex]]. 5 Jet-like dihadron correlations in OO and Ne–Ne collisions at√𝑠NN=5.36TeV with ALICEJoonsuk Bae

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016
[12]

ALICE Collaboration,Constraints on jet quenching in𝑝–Pb collisions at√𝑠NN =5.02TeV measured by the event-activity dependence of semi-inclusive hadron-jet distributions,Phys. Lett. B783(2018) 95 [arXiv:1712.05603 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018
[13]

ATLAS Collaboration,Strong Constraints on Jet Quenching in Centrality-Dependent𝑝+Pb Collisionsat5.02TeVfromATLAS,Phys.Rev.Lett.131(2023)072301[arXiv:2206.01138 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023
[14]

ALICE Collaboration,Evidence of Nuclear Geometry-Driven Anisotropic Flow in O+O and Ne+Ne Collisions at √𝑠NN =5.36TeV,Phys. Rev. Lett.137(2026) 082301 [arXiv:2509.06428 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026
[15]

CMS Collaboration,Observation of Suppressed Charged-Particle Production in Ultrarela- tivistic Oxygen-Oxygen Collisions,Phys. Rev. Lett.136(2026) 162301 [arXiv:2510.09864 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026
[16]

ALICECollaboration,Evidenceforpartonenergylossinoxygen–oxygencollisionsat √𝑠NN= 5.36TeV,arXiv:2606.19967 [nucl-ex]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[17]

ATLAS Collaboration,Observation of centrality-dependent dijet transverse momentum im- balance in O+O and Ne+Ne collisions at√𝑠NN =5.36TeV with the ATLAS detector, arXiv:2606.20463 [nucl-ex]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv
[18]

ALICECollaboration,Anomalousevolutionofthenear-sidejetpeakshapeinPb–Pbcollisions at√𝑠NN=2.76TeV,Phys.Rev.Lett.119(2017)102301[arXiv:1609.06643 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017
[19]

ALICECollaboration,Jetfragmentationtransversemomentummeasurementsfromdi-hadron correlations in√𝑠=7TeV pp and √𝑠NN =5.02TeV𝑝–Pb collisions,JHEP03(2019) 169 [arXiv:1811.09742 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2019
[20]

ALICECollaboration,Multiplicity-dependentjetmodificationfromdi-hadroncorrelationsin pp collisions at√𝑠=13TeV,JHEP03(2025) 194 [arXiv:2409.04501 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025
[24]

ALICE Collaboration,The ALICE experiment at the CERN LHC,JINST3(2008) S08002

View on Pith 2008
[25]

ALICE Collaboration,ALICE upgrades during the LHC Long Shutdown 2,JINST19(2024) P05062 [arXiv:2302.01238 [physics.ins-det]]. 6 Jet-like dihadron correlations in OO and Ne–Ne collisions at√𝑠NN=5.36TeV with ALICEJoonsuk Bae

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024
[26]

ALICECollaboration,TechnicalDesignReportfortheUpgradeoftheALICEInnerTracking System,J. Phys. G41(2014) 087002

View on Pith 2014
[27]

ALICE TPC Collaboration,The upgrade of the ALICE TPC with GEMs and continuous readout,JINST16(2021) P03022 [arXiv:2012.09518 [physics.ins-det]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021
[28]

ALICECollaboration,TheALICEdefinitionofprimaryparticles,ALICE-PUBLIC-2017-005 (2017)

View on Pith 2017
[29]

G.I.Kopylov,Likeparticlecorrelationsasatooltostudythemultipleproductionmechanism, Phys. Lett. B50(1974) 472

View on Pith 1974
[30]

P.Skands,S.CarrazzaandJ.Rojo,TuningPYTHIA8.1: theMonash2013Tune,Eur.Phys.J. C74(2014) 3024 [arXiv:1404.5630 [hep-ph]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014
[31]

C. Bierlich, G. Gustafson, L. Lönnblad and H. Shah,The Angantyr model for Heavy-Ion Collisions inPYTHIA8,JHEP10(2018) 134 [arXiv:1806.10820 [hep-ph]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018
[32]

S. Agostinelliet al.,Geant4—a simulation toolkit,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A506(2003) 250

View on Pith 2003
[33]

R. Barlow,Systematic Errors: facts and fictions,arXiv:hep-ex/0207026. 7

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

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] [21]

S.PrasadfortheALICECollaboration,Jet-likedi-hadroncorrelationsinpO,OO,andNe–Ne collisions,arXiv:2609.24237 [nucl-ex]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[2] [22]

J.Gebhard,A.MazeliauskasandA.Takacs,No-quenchingbaselineforenergylosssignalsin oxygen-oxygen collisions,JHEP04(2025) 034 [arXiv:2410.22405 [hep-ph]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025

[3] [23]

J.Park,J.L.Nagle,D.V.Perepelitsa,S.LimandC.Loizides,Selection-biaseffectsonhigh-𝑝 T yield and correlation measurements in oxygen + oxygen collisions,Phys. Rev. C112(2025) 064916 [arXiv:2507.03603 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith arXiv 2025

[4] [1]

W.Busza,K.RajagopalandW.vanderSchee,HeavyIonCollisions: TheBigPicture,andthe Big Questions,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.68(2018) 339 [arXiv:1802.04801 [hep-ph]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018

[5] [2]

J.-Y.Ollitrault,Anisotropyasasignatureoftransversecollectiveflow,Phys.Rev.D46(1992) 229

View on Pith 1992

[6] [3]

CMS Collaboration,Observation of Long-Range Near-Side Angular Correlations in Proton- Proton Collisions at the LHC,JHEP09(2010) 091 [arXiv:1009.4122 [hep-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2010

[7] [4]

ALICE Collaboration,Long-range angular correlations on the near and away side in𝑝–Pb collisionsat√𝑠NN=5.02TeV,Phys.Lett.B719(2013)29[arXiv:1212.2001 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2013

[8] [5]

PHENIX Collaboration,Creation of quark–gluon plasma droplets with three distinct geome- tries,Nature Phys.15(2019) 214 [arXiv:1805.02973 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith arXiv 2019

[9] [6]

J. L. Nagle and W. A. Zajc,Small System Collectivity in Relativistic Hadronic and Nuclear Collisions,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.68(2018) 211 [arXiv:1801.03477 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018

[10] [7]

J. Brewer, A. Mazeliauskas and W. van der Schee,Opportunities of OO and𝑝O collisions at the LHC,arXiv:2103.01939 [hep-ph]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[11] [8]

STAR Collaboration,Evidence from𝑑+Au measurements for final-state suppression of high-𝑝 T hadrons in Au+Au collisions at RHIC,Phys. Rev. Lett.91(2003) 072304 [arXiv:nucl-ex/0306024]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2003

[12] [9]

ALICE Collaboration,Particle-yield modification in jet-like azimuthal di-hadron corre- lations in Pb–Pb collisions at√𝑠NN =2.76TeV,Phys. Rev. Lett.108(2012) 092301 [arXiv:1110.0121 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2012

[13] [10]

ALICECollaboration,Jet-likecorrelationswithneutralpiontriggersinppandcentralPb–Pb collisions at 2.76 TeV,Phys. Lett. B763(2016) 238 [arXiv:1608.07201 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016

[14] [11]

CMSCollaboration,Decomposingtransversemomentumbalancecontributionsforquenched jets in PbPb collisions at√𝑠NN =2.76TeV,JHEP11(2016) 055 [arXiv:1609.02466 [nucl-ex]]. 5 Jet-like dihadron correlations in OO and Ne–Ne collisions at√𝑠NN=5.36TeV with ALICEJoonsuk Bae

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2016

[15] [12]

ALICE Collaboration,Constraints on jet quenching in𝑝–Pb collisions at√𝑠NN =5.02TeV measured by the event-activity dependence of semi-inclusive hadron-jet distributions,Phys. Lett. B783(2018) 95 [arXiv:1712.05603 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018

[16] [13]

ATLAS Collaboration,Strong Constraints on Jet Quenching in Centrality-Dependent𝑝+Pb Collisionsat5.02TeVfromATLAS,Phys.Rev.Lett.131(2023)072301[arXiv:2206.01138 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2023

[17] [14]

ALICE Collaboration,Evidence of Nuclear Geometry-Driven Anisotropic Flow in O+O and Ne+Ne Collisions at √𝑠NN =5.36TeV,Phys. Rev. Lett.137(2026) 082301 [arXiv:2509.06428 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026

[18] [15]

CMS Collaboration,Observation of Suppressed Charged-Particle Production in Ultrarela- tivistic Oxygen-Oxygen Collisions,Phys. Rev. Lett.136(2026) 162301 [arXiv:2510.09864 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2026

[19] [16]

ALICECollaboration,Evidenceforpartonenergylossinoxygen–oxygencollisionsat √𝑠NN= 5.36TeV,arXiv:2606.19967 [nucl-ex]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[20] [17]

ATLAS Collaboration,Observation of centrality-dependent dijet transverse momentum im- balance in O+O and Ne+Ne collisions at√𝑠NN =5.36TeV with the ATLAS detector, arXiv:2606.20463 [nucl-ex]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv

[21] [18]

ALICECollaboration,Anomalousevolutionofthenear-sidejetpeakshapeinPb–Pbcollisions at√𝑠NN=2.76TeV,Phys.Rev.Lett.119(2017)102301[arXiv:1609.06643 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2017

[22] [19]

ALICECollaboration,Jetfragmentationtransversemomentummeasurementsfromdi-hadron correlations in√𝑠=7TeV pp and √𝑠NN =5.02TeV𝑝–Pb collisions,JHEP03(2019) 169 [arXiv:1811.09742 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2019

[23] [20]

ALICECollaboration,Multiplicity-dependentjetmodificationfromdi-hadroncorrelationsin pp collisions at√𝑠=13TeV,JHEP03(2025) 194 [arXiv:2409.04501 [nucl-ex]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2025

[24] [24]

ALICE Collaboration,The ALICE experiment at the CERN LHC,JINST3(2008) S08002

View on Pith 2008

[25] [25]

ALICE Collaboration,ALICE upgrades during the LHC Long Shutdown 2,JINST19(2024) P05062 [arXiv:2302.01238 [physics.ins-det]]. 6 Jet-like dihadron correlations in OO and Ne–Ne collisions at√𝑠NN=5.36TeV with ALICEJoonsuk Bae

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2024

[26] [26]

ALICECollaboration,TechnicalDesignReportfortheUpgradeoftheALICEInnerTracking System,J. Phys. G41(2014) 087002

View on Pith 2014

[27] [27]

ALICE TPC Collaboration,The upgrade of the ALICE TPC with GEMs and continuous readout,JINST16(2021) P03022 [arXiv:2012.09518 [physics.ins-det]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2021

[28] [28]

ALICECollaboration,TheALICEdefinitionofprimaryparticles,ALICE-PUBLIC-2017-005 (2017)

View on Pith 2017

[29] [29]

G.I.Kopylov,Likeparticlecorrelationsasatooltostudythemultipleproductionmechanism, Phys. Lett. B50(1974) 472

View on Pith 1974

[30] [30]

P.Skands,S.CarrazzaandJ.Rojo,TuningPYTHIA8.1: theMonash2013Tune,Eur.Phys.J. C74(2014) 3024 [arXiv:1404.5630 [hep-ph]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2014

[31] [31]

C. Bierlich, G. Gustafson, L. Lönnblad and H. Shah,The Angantyr model for Heavy-Ion Collisions inPYTHIA8,JHEP10(2018) 134 [arXiv:1806.10820 [hep-ph]]

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2018

[32] [32]

S. Agostinelliet al.,Geant4—a simulation toolkit,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A506(2003) 250

View on Pith 2003

[33] [33]

R. Barlow,Systematic Errors: facts and fictions,arXiv:hep-ex/0207026. 7

View on Pith Pith review arXiv