pith. sign in

arxiv: 2606.02285 · v1 · pith:6EEOUXONnew · submitted 2026-06-01 · ⚛️ nucl-ex · hep-ex

Centrality dependence of charged-hadron pseudorapidity distributions in oxygen-oxygen collisions at sqrt{s_NN} = 5.36 TeV

CMS Collaboration This is my paper

Pith reviewed 2026-06-28 11:45 UTC · model grok-4.3

classification ⚛️ nucl-ex hep-ex
keywords charged hadronspseudorapidity distributionsoxygen-oxygen collisionscentrality dependenceheavy-ion collisionsLHC
0
0 comments X

The pith

Charged-hadron density per participating nucleon in central OO collisions matches central PbPb at similar energy.

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

The paper reports the first measurement of charged-hadron pseudorapidity distributions in oxygen-oxygen collisions at 5.36 TeV. The midrapidity density is 41.8 averaged over all centralities and reaches 135.0 in the most central events. When normalized by the number of participating nucleons, this density in central OO collisions is consistent with the value seen in central PbPb collisions. The data preserve the overall energy-scaling trend seen in heavier systems but deviate from simple participant or system-size scaling, underscoring the influence of collision geometry and finite-size effects in lighter nuclei. A hydrodynamic model matches the observed distributions better than other event generators.

Core claim

The particle density at midrapidity divided by the number of nucleons participating in the interaction in central OO collisions is consistent with that observed in central PbPb collisions at similar collision energy. While the overall energy-scaling behavior observed in other nucleus-nucleus collisions is preserved, the data exhibit deviations from simple participant and system-size scaling, highlighting the role of collision geometry and finite-size effects in light ion collisions.

What carries the argument

Centrality classes based on nuclear overlap geometry to extract dNch/dη distributions and participant-normalized yields.

If this is right

  • The TRAJECTUM hydrodynamic model provides the best overall description of the data, particularly in central collisions.
  • The energy-scaling behavior observed in other nucleus-nucleus collisions is preserved in OO collisions.
  • Deviations from simple participant and system-size scaling appear, indicating the role of collision geometry and finite-size effects.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • The per-participant consistency points to a particle-production mechanism that is largely independent of overall system size at this energy.
  • Light-ion data may require refined modeling of geometry fluctuations to explain the observed deviations from simple scaling.
  • Similar measurements in other light systems could test whether finite-size effects grow systematically with decreasing nuclear mass.

Load-bearing premise

The Glauber-model determination of participating nucleons for each centrality class is accurate enough that its uncertainties do not change the reported scaling conclusions.

What would settle it

A clear difference between the midrapidity density per participating nucleon in central OO collisions and the corresponding value in central PbPb collisions at the same energy would falsify the consistency claim.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2606.02285 by CMS Collaboration.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: The dNch/dη distribution in OO collisions at √ s NN = 5.36 TeV for the 0–100% cen￾trality class. The result is symmetrized about η = 0. Predictions from the HIJING [39], EPOS LHC [25, 40], and AMPT [47] event generators are also shown. The lower panel shows the ratios of the model predictions to the data, normalized to unity at midrapidity. In the upper panel, the gray boxes indicate the total systematic u… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: The dNch/dη distribution in OO collisions at √ s NN = 5.36 TeV for several centrality classes. In all cases, the data are symmetrized about η = 0. Boxes indicate the total systematic uncertainties, while statistical uncertainties are negligible. are measured in the finer centrality intervals listed in [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: Charged-hadron dNch/dη at midrapidity in OO collisions at √ s NN = 5.36 TeV as a function of event centrality, shown for the measured values (left) and normalized by 2A (right), where A is the mass number of the colliding nuclei. The results are compared with measurements in PbPb and XeXe collisions at similar collision energies by the CMS [17, 22] and ALICE [18, 21, 23] Collaborations. The bands around th… view at source ↗
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Charged-hadron dNch/dη at midrapidity, normalized by ⟨Npart⟩, in OO collisions at √ s NN = 5.36 TeV shown as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ (left) and ⟨Npart⟩/2A (right), where A is the mass number of the colliding nuclei. The results are compared with measurements in PbPb and XeXe collisions by the CMS [17, 22] and ALICE [18, 21, 23] Collaborations. The bands around the data points denote the systematic uncertaint… view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Charged-hadron dNch/dη at midrapidity in OO collisions at √ s NN = 5.36 TeV as a function of event centrality (left) and dNch/dη normalized to ⟨Npart⟩ as a function of ⟨Npart⟩ (right). The results are compared to predictions from the HIJING [39], EPOS LHC [25, 40], and AMPT [47] event generators, as well as the hydrodynamic model TRAJECTUM [52] using two different nuclear density descriptions for oxygen. T… view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: Comparison of average dNch/dη at midrapidity, scaled by ⟨Npart⟩ in pPb [32, 53], pAu [54], dAu [55–57], and central heavy ion collisions [16, 17, 20, 22, 23, 56, 58–68], as well as nonsingle-diffractive (NSD) [27, 28, 68–71] and inelastic [31, 58, 72, 73] pp collisions. The data points for nucleus-nucleus (AA) collisions at √ s NN = 2.76 TeV have been shifted horizontally by ±10% for visibility. The dashed… view at source ↗
read the original abstract

We report the first measurement of charged-hadron pseudorapidity ($\eta$) distributions in oxygen-oxygen (OO) collisions at a nucleon-nucleon center-of-mass energy of $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.36 TeV. The data were recorded by the CMS experiment at the LHC in 2025. Primary charged-hadron yields are measured in the range $|\eta|$ $\lt$ 2.4 as a function of centrality (the overlap of the two nuclei). The results are compared with previous measurements in lead-lead (PbPb) and xenon-xenon collisions at similar energies, as well as predictions from several Monte Carlo event generators and a hydrodynamic model. The charged-hadron pseudorapidity density in the midrapidity region ($|\eta|$ $\lt$ 0.5) is $\langle$dN$_{\text{ch}}$/d$\eta\rangle$ = 41.8 $\pm$ 1.1 (syst) integrated over centrality and 135.0 $\pm$ 4.0 (syst) for the most central (i.e., largest nuclear overlap) events. The hydrodynamic model TRAJECTUM provides the best overall description of the data, particularly in central collisions. The particle density at midrapidity divided by the number of nucleons participating in the interaction in central OO collisions is consistent with that observed in central PbPb collisions at similar collision energy. While the overall energy-scaling behavior observed in other nucleus-nucleus collisions is preserved, the data exhibit deviations from simple participant and system-size scaling, highlighting the role of collision geometry and finite-size effects in light ion collisions.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, simulated authors' rebuttal, and a circularity audit. Tearing a paper down is the easy half of reading it; the pith above is the substance, this is the friction.

Referee Report

1 major / 2 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports the first measurement of charged-hadron pseudorapidity distributions in oxygen-oxygen collisions at √s_NN = 5.36 TeV with the CMS experiment. It gives the midrapidity density ⟨dN_ch/dη⟩ = 41.8 ± 1.1 (syst) integrated over centrality and 135.0 ± 4.0 (syst) for the most central events, compares the centrality dependence to PbPb and XeXe data at similar energies, to several Monte Carlo generators, and to the TRAJECTUM hydrodynamic model, and states that dN_ch/dη / N_part for central OO is consistent with central PbPb while noting deviations from simple participant scaling.

Significance. This supplies the first light-ion (oxygen) data at LHC energies, enabling direct tests of system-size and geometry dependence in particle production. The observation that TRAJECTUM provides the best description, particularly centrally, and that overall energy scaling is preserved offers concrete benchmarks for models of heavy-ion collisions. The N_part-normalized consistency with PbPb, if the associated uncertainties are robust, would support universality of midrapidity yields across system sizes.

major comments (1)
  1. [Centrality determination and N_part scaling discussion] The headline consistency statement that dN_ch/dη / N_part in central OO matches central PbPb depends on Glauber Monte Carlo values of N_part for the OO centrality classes. The manuscript must quantify and propagate the systematic uncertainty on these N_part values arising from the nuclear density profile, nucleon-nucleon cross section, and fluctuation model for oxygen (as opposed to heavier systems); a shift exceeding ~5 % in the most-central bin would move the scaled density outside the quoted ±4.0 systematic band and alter the conclusion. This uncertainty budget should be shown explicitly alongside the PbPb comparison.
minor comments (2)
  1. [Abstract and results section] The abstract refers to comparisons with Monte Carlo event generators without naming them; the results section and figure captions should list the specific generators and their versions or tunes.
  2. [Results and uncertainty sections] Figure captions and text should clarify whether the quoted systematic uncertainties on ⟨dN_ch/dη⟩ already incorporate the full Glauber-related component or only detector-related contributions.

Simulated Author's Rebuttal

1 responses · 0 unresolved

We thank the referee for the constructive comment on the N_part uncertainty. We agree that this requires explicit quantification for the oxygen system and will revise the manuscript to address it.

read point-by-point responses

  1. Referee: [Centrality determination and N_part scaling discussion] The headline consistency statement that dN_ch/dη / N_part in central OO matches central PbPb depends on Glauber Monte Carlo values of N_part for the OO centrality classes. The manuscript must quantify and propagate the systematic uncertainty on these N_part values arising from the nuclear density profile, nucleon-nucleon cross section, and fluctuation model for oxygen (as opposed to heavier systems); a shift exceeding ~5 % in the most-central bin would move the scaled density outside the quoted ±4.0 systematic band and alter the conclusion. This uncertainty budget should be shown explicitly alongside the PbPb comparison.

    Authors: We agree that the consistency statement relies on the Glauber-derived N_part values and that the specific uncertainties for the lighter oxygen system (nuclear density profile, NN cross section, and fluctuations) were not separately quantified in the original submission. In the revised manuscript we will add an explicit uncertainty budget obtained by varying the Woods-Saxon parameters for oxygen, the NN inelastic cross section within its uncertainty, and the fluctuation model. This additional systematic will be propagated to the dN_ch/dη / N_part ratio in the most-central bin and displayed as a separate uncertainty band in the PbPb comparison figure. We have performed the variations and find the resulting shift on N_part to be below 4 % in the 0–5 % centrality class, but the full budget will be documented so that readers can judge whether the conclusion remains robust. revision: yes

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

Primary experimental measurements; no derivation reduces to self-inputs or self-citations

full rationale

The paper reports direct measurements of dNch/dη versus centrality in OO collisions, with quoted values obtained from detector data. Centrality binning employs a standard Glauber Monte Carlo for N_part, but this is an external modeling step whose outputs are not redefined or fitted inside the paper's own equations to produce the reported yields. The scaling comparison to PbPb data is an external benchmark, not a self-derived quantity. No self-citation chain, ansatz smuggling, or fitted-input-as-prediction pattern appears in the abstract or described results. The work is self-contained as a measurement paper against external references.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 0 axioms · 0 invented entities

This is an experimental measurement report. The central claim rests on standard detector calibration, event reconstruction, and Glauber-model centrality procedures rather than new theoretical axioms or free parameters introduced by the paper.

pith-pipeline@v0.9.1-grok · 5851 in / 1198 out tokens · 32200 ms · 2026-06-28T11:45:34.590396+00:00 · methodology

discussion (0)

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

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

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

  1. Event-by-event fluctuations of elliptic flow in ultrarelativistic O+O collisions

    nucl-th 2026-06 unverdicted novelty 5.0

    In O+O collisions, initial eccentricity and elliptic flow are fluctuation-driven and can be reproduced from a small set of uncorrelated modes.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

73 extracted references · 70 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper · 48 internal anchors

  1. [1]

    Heavy Ion Collisions: The Big Picture, and the Big Questions

    W. Busza, K. Rajagopal, and W. van der Schee, “Heavy ion collisions: The big picture, and the big questions”,Ann. Rev. of Nucl. Part Sci.68(2018) 339, doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-101917-020852,arXiv:1802.04801

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-101917-020852 2018

  2. [2]

    Relativistic fluid dynamics in and out of equilibrium

    P . Romatschke and U. Romatschke, “Relativistic fluid dynamics in and out of equilibrium”. Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge University Press, 2019.doi:10.1017/9781108651998, ISBN 978-1-108-48368-1, 978-1-108-75002-8

    work page doi:10.1017/9781108651998 2019

  3. [3]

    Gluon saturation and initial conditions for relativistic heavy ion collisions

    J. L. Albacete and C. Marquet, “Gluon saturation and initial conditions for relativistic heavy ion collisions”,Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.76(2014) 1, doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2014.01.004,arXiv:1401.4866

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2014.01.004 2014

  4. [4]

    Hadron production in nuclear collisions at RHIC and high density QCD

    D. Kharzeev and M. Nardi, “Hadron production in nuclear collisions at RHIC and high density QCD”,Phys. Lett. B507(2001) 121, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(01)00457-9,arXiv:nucl-th/0012025

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(01)00457-9 2001

  5. [5]

    Constraints from the first LHC data on hadronic event generators for ultra-high energy cosmic-ray physics

    D. d’Enterria et al., “Constraints from the first LHC data on hadronic event generators for ultra-high energy cosmic-ray physics”,Astropart. Phys.35(2011) 98, doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2011.05.002,arXiv:1101.5596

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.astropartphys.2011.05.002 2011

  6. [6]

    Overview of high-density QCD studies with the CMS experiment at the LHC

    CMS Collaboration, “Overview of high-density QCD studies with the CMS experiment at the LHC”,Phys. Rept.1115(2025) 219,doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2024.11.007, arXiv:2405.10785

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physrep.2024.11.007 2025

  7. [7]

    Heavy quarks and jets as probes of the QGP

    L. Apolin ´ario, Y.-J. Lee, and M. Winn, “Heavy quarks and jets as probes of the QGP”, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.127(2022) 103990,doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2022.103990, arXiv:2203.16352

    work page doi:10.1016/j.ppnp.2022.103990 2022

  8. [8]

    Effect ofαclusters on particle production in OO and pO collisions at energies available at the CERN Large Hadron Collider

    D. Sharma et al., “Effect ofαclusters on particle production in OO and pO collisions at energies available at the CERN Large Hadron Collider”,Phys. Rev. C112(2025) 034905, doi:10.1103/l6mj-sgrn,arXiv:2503.20339

    work page doi:10.1103/l6mj-sgrn 2025

  9. [9]

    Future physics opportunities for high-density QCD at the LHC with heavy-ion and proton beams

    Z. Citron et al., “Future physics opportunities for high-density QCD at the LHC with heavy-ion and proton beams”,CERN Y ellow Rep. Monogr.7(2019) 1159, doi:10.23731/CYRM-2019-007.1159,arXiv:1812.06772

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.23731/cyrm-2019-007.1159 2019

  10. [10]

    Ab-initio nucleon-nucleon correlations and their impact on high energy 16O+16O collisions

    C. Zhang et al., “Ab-initio nucleon-nucleon correlations and their impact on high energy 16O+16O collisions”,Phys. Lett. B862(2025) 139322, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2025.139322,arXiv:2404.08385

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2025.139322 2025

  11. [11]

    Evidence of nuclear geometry-driven anisotropic flow in OO and Ne−Ne collisions at √sNN = 5.36 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, “Evidence of nuclear geometry-driven anisotropic flow in OO and Ne−Ne collisions at √sNN = 5.36 TeV”, 9, 2025.arXiv:2509.06428. Submitted toPhys. Rev. Lett.. References 15

    arXiv 2025

  12. [12]

    Measurement of the azimuthal anisotropy of charged particles in $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}}=5.36$ TeV $^{16}$O$+^{16}$O and $^{20}$Ne$+^{20}$Ne collisions with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of the azimuthal anisotropy of charged particles in√sNN =5.36 TeV 16O+16O and 20Ne+20Ne collisions with the ATLAS detector”,Phys. Rev. C113(2026) 045205,doi:10.1103/xqxz-8bhf,arXiv:2509.05171

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/xqxz-8bhf 2026

  13. [13]

    Observation of long-range collective flow in OO and NeNe collisions and implications for nuclear structure studies

    CMS Collaboration, “Observation of long-range collective flow in OO and NeNe collisions and implications for nuclear structure studies”, 10, 2025.arXiv:2510.02580. Submitted toPhys. Rev. Lett

    arXiv 2025

  14. [14]

    System Size, Energy and Centrality Dependence of Pseudorapidity Distributions of Charged Particles in Relativistic Heavy Ion Collisions

    PHOBOS Collaboration, “System size, energy and centrality dependence of pseudorapidity distributions of charged particles in relativistic heavy ion collisions”, Phys. Rev. Lett.102(2009) 142301,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.102.142301, arXiv:0709.4008

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.102.142301 2009

  15. [15]

    Charged-Particle Pseudorapidity Distributions in Au+Au Collisions at sqrt(s_NN)=62.4 GeV

    PHOBOS Collaboration, “Charged-particle pseudorapidity distributions in Au+Au collisions at √sNN =62.4 GeV”,Phys. Rev. C74(2006) 021901, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.74.021901,arXiv:nucl-ex/0509034

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.74.021901 2006

  16. [16]

    Pseudorapidity distributions of charged particles from Au+Au collisions at the maximum RHIC energy, Sqrt(s_NN) = 200 GeV

    BRAHMS Collaboration, “Pseudorapidity distributions of charged particles from Au+Au collisions at the maximum RHIC energy”,Phys. Rev. Lett.88(2002) 202301, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.88.202301,arXiv:nucl-ex/0112001

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.88.202301 2002

  17. [17]

    Pseudorapidity distributions of charged hadrons in xenon-xenon collisions at √sNN =5.44 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Pseudorapidity distributions of charged hadrons in xenon-xenon collisions at √sNN =5.44 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B799(2019) 135049, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2019.135049,arXiv:1902.03603

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2019.135049 2019

  18. [18]

    Centrality and pseudorapidity dependence of the charged-particle multiplicity density in Xe-Xe collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 5.44 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, “Centrality and pseudorapidity dependence of the charged-particle multiplicity density in Xe–Xe collisions at √sNN =5.44 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B 790(2019) 35,doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2018.12.048,arXiv:1805.04432

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2018.12.048 2019

  19. [19]

    Centrality dependence of the charged-particle multiplicity density at mid-rapidity in Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 2.76 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, “Centrality dependence of the charged-particle multiplicity density at mid-rapidity in Pb-Pb collisions at √sNN =2.76 TeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.106 (2011) 032301,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.106.032301,arXiv:1012.1657

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.106.032301 2011

  20. [20]

    Dependence on pseudorapidity and centrality of charged hadron production in PbPb collisions at a nucleon-nucleon centre-of-mass energy of 2.76 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Dependence on pseudorapidity and on centrality of charged hadron production in PbPb collisions at √sNN =2.76 TeV”,JHEP08(2011) 141, doi:10.1007/JHEP08(2011)141,arXiv:1107.4800

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep08(2011)141 2011

  21. [21]

    Centrality dependence of the charged-particle multiplicity density at mid-rapidity in Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, “Centrality dependence of the charged-particle multiplicity density at midrapidity in Pb-Pb collisions at √sNN =5.02 TeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.116(2016) 222302,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.116.222302,arXiv:1512.06104

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.116.222302 2016

  22. [22]

    Pseudorapidity distributions of charged hadrons in lead-lead collisions at √sNN =5.36 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Pseudorapidity distributions of charged hadrons in lead-lead collisions at √sNN =5.36 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B861(2025) 139279, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2025.139279,arXiv:2409.00838

    work page doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2025.139279 2025

  23. [23]

    Centrality dependence of charged-particle pseudorapidity density at midrapidity in Pb-Pb collisions at √sNN =5.36 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, “Centrality dependence of charged-particle pseudorapidity density at midrapidity in Pb-Pb collisions at √sNN =5.36 TeV”, 4, 2025. arXiv:2504.02505. Submitted toPhys. Lett. B

    arXiv 2025

  24. [24]

    Gluon shadowing and hadron production in heavy-ion collisions at LHC

    W.-T. Deng, X.-N. Wang, and R. Xu, “Gluon shadowing and hadron production in heavy-ion collisions at LHC”,Phys. Lett. B701(2011) 133, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2011.05.040,arXiv:1011.5907. 16

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2011.05.040 2011

  25. [25]

    EPOS LHC : test of collective hadronization with LHC data

    T. Pierog et al., “EPOS LHC: Test of collective hadronization with data measured at the CERN Large Hadron Collider”,Phys. Rev. C92(2015) 034906, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.92.034906,arXiv:1306.0121

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.92.034906 2015

  26. [26]

    A model of jet quenching in ultrarelativistic heavy ion collisions and high-pt hadron spectra at RHIC

    I. P . Lokhtin and A. M. Snigirev, “A model of jet quenching in ultrarelativistic heavy ion collisions and high-pT hadron spectra at RHIC”,Eur. Phys. J. C45(2006) 211, doi:10.1140/epjc/s2005-02426-3,arXiv:hep-ph/0506189

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s2005-02426-3 2006

  27. [27]

    Transverse momentum and pseudorapidity distributions of charged hadrons in pp collisions at sqrt(s) = 0.9 and 2.36 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Transverse momentum and pseudorapidity distributions of charged hadrons in pp collisions at √s=0.9 and 2.36 TeV”,JHEP02(2010) 041, doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2010)041,arXiv:1002.0621

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep02(2010)041 2010

  28. [28]

    Transverse-momentum and pseudorapidity distributions of charged hadrons in pp collisions at sqrt(s) = 7 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Transverse-momentum and pseudorapidity distributions of charged hadrons in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.105(2010) 022002, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.022002,arXiv:1005.3299

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.105.022002 2010

  29. [29]

    Charged particle multiplicities in pp interactions at sqrt(s) = 0.9, 2.36, and 7 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Charged particle multiplicities in pp interactions at √s=0.9, 2.36, and 7 TeV”,JHEP01(2011) 079,doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2011)079, arXiv:1011.5531

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep01(2011)079 2011

  30. [30]

    Measurement of pseudorapidity distributions of charged particles in proton-proton collisions at sqrt(s) = 8 TeV by the CMS and TOTEM experiments

    CMS and TOTEM Collaborations, “Measurement of pseudorapidity distributions of charged particles in proton-proton collisions at √s=8 TeV by the CMS and TOTEM experiments”,Eur. Phys. J. C74(2014) 3053, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-3053-6,arXiv:1405.0722

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-014-3053-6 2014

  31. [31]

    Pseudorapidity distribution of charged hadrons in proton-proton collisions at sqrt(s) = 13 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Pseudorapidity distribution of charged hadrons in proton-proton collisions at √s=13 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B751(2015) 143, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2015.10.004,arXiv:1507.05915

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2015.10.004 2015

  32. [32]

    Pseudorapidity distributions of charged hadrons in proton-lead collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_\mathrm{NN}}} =$ 5.02 and 8.16 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Pseudorapidity distributions of charged hadrons in proton-lead collisions at √sNN =5.02 and 8.16 TeV”,JHEP01(2018) 045, doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2018)045,arXiv:1710.09355

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep01(2018)045 2018

  33. [33]

    Glauber modeling in high energy nuclear collisions

    M. L. Miller, K. Reygers, S. J. Sanders, and P . Steinberg, “Glauber modeling in high energy nuclear collisions”,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.57(2007) 205, doi:10.1146/annurev.nucl.57.090506.123020,arXiv:nucl-ex/0701025

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev.nucl.57.090506.123020 2007

  34. [34]

    Progress in the Glauber model at collider energies

    D. d’Enterria and C. Loizides, “Progress in the Glauber model at collider energies”,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.71(2021) 315,doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-102419-060007, arXiv:2011.14909

    work page doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-102419-060007 2021

  35. [35]

    HEPData record for this analysis, 2026.doi:10.17182/hepdata.172783

    work page doi:10.17182/hepdata.172783 2026

  36. [36]

    The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC

    CMS Collaboration, “The CMS experiment at the CERN LHC”,JINST3(2008) S08004, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/S08004

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/3/08/s08004 2008

  37. [37]

    Development of the CMS detector for the CERN LHC Run 3

    CMS Collaboration, “Development of the CMS detector for the CERN LHC Run 3”, JINST19(2024) P05064,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/05/P05064, arXiv:2309.05466

    work page doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/05/p05064 2024

  38. [38]

    CMS technical design report for the pixel detector upgrade

    CMS Collaboration, “CMS technical design report for the pixel detector upgrade”, technical report, 2012.doi:10.2172/1151650. References 17

    work page doi:10.2172/1151650 2012

  39. [39]

    HIJING: A Monte Carlo model for multiple jet production in pp, pA and AA collisions

    X.-N. Wang and M. Gyulassy, “HIJING: A Monte Carlo model for multiple jet production in pp, pA and AA collisions”,Phys. Rev. D44(1991) 3501, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.44.3501

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.44.3501 1991

  40. [40]

    Parton Ladder Splitting and the Rapidity Dependence of Transverse Momentum Spectra in Deuteron-Gold Collisions at RHIC

    K. Werner, F.-M. Liu, and T. Pierog, “Parton ladder splitting and the rapidity dependence of transverse momentum spectra in deuteron-gold collisions at the BNL Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider”,Phys. Rev. C74(2006) 044902, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.74.044902,arXiv:hep-ph/0506232

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.74.044902 2006

  41. [41]

    STARlight: A Monte Carlo simulation program for ultra-peripheral collisions of relativistic ions

    S. R. Klein et al., “STARlight: A Monte Carlo simulation program for ultra-peripheral collisions of relativistic ions”,Comput. Phys. Commun.212(2017) 258, doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2016.10.016,arXiv:1607.03838

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.cpc.2016.10.016 2017

  42. [42]

    The Monte Carlo Event Generator DPMJET-III

    S. Roesler, R. Engel, and J. Ranft, “The Monte Carlo event generator DPMJET-III”, Advanced Monte Carlo for radiation physics, particle transport simulation and applications. Proceedings, Conference, MC2000, Lisbon, Portugal, October 23-26, 2000(2000) 1033, doi:10.1007/978-3-642-18211-2_166,arXiv:hep-ph/0012252

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/978-3-642-18211-2_166 2000

  43. [43]

    Data-driven method to estimate contamination from light ion beam transmutation at colliders

    S. J. Das and A. Baty, “Data-driven method to estimate contamination from light ion beam transmutation at colliders”,Phys. Rev. C113(2026) 044907, doi:10.1103/f4c5-yys5,arXiv:2509.09736

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/f4c5-yys5 2026

  44. [44]

    Observation and studies of jet quenching in PbPb collisions at nucleon-nucleon center-of-mass energy = 2.76 TeV

    CMS Collaboration, “Observation and studies of jet quenching in PbPb collisions at√sNN =2.76 TeV”,Phys. Rev. C84(2011) 024906, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.84.024906,arXiv:1102.1957

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.84.024906 2011

  45. [45]

    Glauber predictions for oxygen and neon collisions at energies available at the CERN Large Hadron Collider

    C. Loizides, “Glauber predictions for oxygen and neon collisions at energies available at the CERN Large Hadron Collider”,Phys. Rev. C113(2026) 014914, doi:10.1103/mkp8-zgxh,arXiv:2507.05853

    work page doi:10.1103/mkp8-zgxh 2026

  46. [46]

    and others

    GEANT4 Collaboration, “GEANT4—a simulation toolkit”,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A506 (2003) 250,doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8

    work page doi:10.1016/s0168-9002(03)01368-8 2003

  47. [47]

    A Multi-Phase Transport Model for Relativistic Heavy Ion Collisions

    Z.-W. Lin et al., “A multi-phase transport model for relativistic heavy ion collisions”, Phys. Rev. C72(2005) 064901,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.72.064901, arXiv:nucl-th/0411110

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.72.064901 2005

  48. [48]

    The Angantyr model for Heavy-Ion Collisions in PYTHIA8

    C. Bierlich, G. Gustafson, L. L ¨onnblad, and H. Shah, “The Angantyr model for heavy-ion collisions in PYTHIA8”,JHEP10(2018) 134,doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2018)134, arXiv:1806.10820

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/jhep10(2018)134 2018

  49. [49]

    ZPC 1.0.1: a parton cascade for ultrarelativistic heavy ion collisions

    B. Zhang, “ZPC 1.0.1: A parton cascade for ultrarelativistic heavy ion collisions”, Comput. Phys. Commun.109(1998) 193,doi:10.1016/S0010-4655(98)00010-1, arXiv:nucl-th/9709009

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0010-4655(98)00010-1 1998

  50. [50]

    Formation of superdense hadronic matter in high energy heavy-ion collisions

    B.-A. Li and C. M. Ko, “Formation of superdense hadronic matter in high energy heavy-ion collisions”,Phys. Rev. C52(1995) 2037,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.52.2037, arXiv:nucl-th/9505016

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.52.2037 1995

  51. [51]

    Evolution of transverse flow and effective temperatures in the parton phase from a multi-phase transport model

    Z.-W. Lin, “Evolution of transverse flow and effective temperatures in the parton phase from a multi-phase transport model”,Phys. Rev. C90(2014) 014904, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.90.014904,arXiv:1403.6321. 18

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.90.014904 2014

  52. [52]

    Exploiting 20Ne Isotopes for Precision Characterizations of Collectivity in Small Systems

    G. Giacalone et al., “Exploiting 20Ne Isotopes for Precision Characterizations of Collectivity in Small Systems”,Phys. Rev. Lett.135(2025) 012302, doi:10.1103/k8rb-jgvq,arXiv:2402.05995

    work page doi:10.1103/k8rb-jgvq 2025

  53. [53]

    Pseudorapidity density of charged particles in p-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}} = 5.02$ TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, “Pseudorapidity density of charged particles in p+Pb collisions at√sNN =5.02 TeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.110(2013) 032301, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.032301,arXiv:1210.3615

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.110.032301 2013

  54. [54]

    Charged Particle Production in Proton-, Deuteron-, Oxygen- and Sulphur-Nucleus Collisions at 200 GeV per Nucleon

    NA35 Collaboration, “Charged particle production in proton-, deuteron-, oxygen- and sulphur-nucleus collisions at 200 GeV per nucleon”,Eur. Phys. J. C2(1998) 643, doi:10.1007/s100520050167,arXiv:hep-ex/9711001

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1007/s100520050167 1998

  55. [55]

    Pseudorapidity Distribution of Charged Particles in d + Au Collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV

    PHOBOS Collaboration, “Pseudorapidity distribution of charged particles in d+Au collisions at √sNN =200 GeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.93(2004) 082301, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.082301,arXiv:nucl-ex/0311009

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.93.082301 2004

  56. [56]

    Transverse energy production and charged-particle multiplicity at midrapidity in various systems from $\sqrt{s_{NN}}=7.7$ to 200 GeV

    PHENIX Collaboration, “Transverse energy production and charged-particle multiplicity at midrapidity in various systems from √sNN =7.7 to 200 GeV”,Phys. Rev. C93(2016) 024901,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.93.024901,arXiv:1509.06727

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.93.024901 2016

  57. [57]

    Measurements of azimuthal anisotropy and charged-particle multiplicity in $d$$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}=$200, 62.4, 39, and 19.6 GeV

    PHENIX Collaboration, “Measurements of azimuthal anisotropy and charged-particle multiplicity in d+Au collisions at √sNN =200, 62.4, 39, and 19.6 GeV”,Phys. Rev. C96 (2017) 064905,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.96.064905,arXiv:1708.06983

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.96.064905 2017

  58. [58]

    Phobos results on charged particle multiplicity and pseudorapidity distributions in Au+Au, Cu+Cu, d+Au, and p+p collisions at ultra-relativistic energies

    PHOBOS Collaboration, “Phobos results on charged particle multiplicity and pseudorapidity distributions in Au+Au, Cu+Cu, d+Au, and p+p collisions at ultra-relativistic energies”,Phys. Rev. C83(2011) 024913, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.83.024913,arXiv:1011.1940

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.83.024913 2011

  59. [59]

    Scaling of charged particle multiplicity in PbPb collisions at SPS energies

    NA50 Collaboration, “Scaling of charged particle multiplicity in PbPb collisions at SPS energies”,Phys. Lett. B530(2002) 43,doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(02)01353-9

    work page doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(02)01353-9 2002

  60. [60]

    Multiplicity distribution and spectra of negatively charged hadrons in Au+Au collisions at sqrt(s_nn) = 130 GeV

    STAR Collaboration, “Multiplicity distribution and spectra of negatively charged hadrons in Au+Au collisions at √sNN =130 GeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.87(2001) 112303, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.112303,arXiv:nucl-ex/0106004

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.87.112303 2001

  61. [61]

    Charged particle densities from Au+Au collisions at sqrt{s_{NN}}=130 GeV

    BRAHMS Collaboration, “Charged particle densities from Au+Au collisions at√sNN =130 GeV”,Phys. Lett. B523(2001) 227, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(01)01333-8,arXiv:nucl-ex/0108016

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/s0370-2693(01)01333-8 2001

  62. [62]

    Centrality Dependence of Charged Particle Multiplicity in Au-Au Collisions at sqrt(s_NN)=130 GeV

    PHENIX Collaboration, “Centrality dependence of charged particle multiplicity in Au-Au collisions at √sNN =130 GeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.86(2001) 3500, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.86.3500,arXiv:nucl-ex/0012008

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.86.3500 2001

  63. [63]

    Charged particle multiplicity near mid-rapidity in central Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s} = $ 56 and 130 AGeV

    PHOBOS Collaboration, “Charged-particle multiplicity near midrapidity in central Au+Au collisions at √sNN =56 and 130 GeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.85(2000) 3100, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.85.3100,arXiv:hep-ex/0007036

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.85.3100 2000

  64. [64]

    Charged-particle pseudorapidity density distributions from Au+Au collisions at sqrt(sNN)=130 GeV

    PHOBOS Collaboration, “Charged-particle pseudorapidity density distributions from Au+Au collisions at √sNN =130 GeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.87(2001) 102303, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.87.102303,arXiv:nucl-ex/0106006

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.87.102303 2001

  65. [65]

    Charged-particle multiplicity density at mid-rapidity in central Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}$ = 2.76 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, “Charged-particle multiplicity density at midrapidity in central Pb-Pb collisions at √sNN =2.76 TeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.105(2010) 252301, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.252301,arXiv:1011.3916. References 19

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevlett.105.252301 2010

  66. [66]

    Measurement of the centrality dependence of the charged particle pseudorapidity distribution in lead-lead collisions at sqrt(s_NN) = 2.76 TeV with the ATLAS detector

    ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of the centrality dependence of the charged particle pseudorapidity distribution in lead-lead collisions at √sNN =2.76 TeV with the ATLAS detector”,Phys. Lett. B710(2012) 363, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.02.045,arXiv:1108.6027

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2012.02.045 2012

  67. [67]

    Identified particle production, azimuthal anisotropy, and interferometry measurements in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 9.2 GeV

    STAR Collaboration, “Identified particle production, azimuthal anisotropy, and interferometry measurements in Au+Au collisions at √sNN =9.2 GeV”,Phys. Rev. C81 (2010) 024911,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.81.024911,arXiv:0909.4131

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.81.024911 2010

  68. [68]

    Systematic Measurements of Identified Particle Spectra in pp, d+Au and Au+Au Collisions from STAR

    STAR Collaboration, “Systematic measurements of identified particle spectra in pp, d+Au and Au+Au collisions from STAR”,Phys. Rev. C79(2009) 034909, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.79.034909,arXiv:0808.2041

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1103/physrevc.79.034909 2009

  69. [69]

    A study of the general characteristics of p ¯p collisions at√s=0.2 TeV to 0.9 TeV

    UA1 Collaboration, “A study of the general characteristics of p ¯p collisions at√s=0.2 TeV to 0.9 TeV”,Nucl. Phys. B335(1990) 261, doi:10.1016/0550-3213(90)90493-W

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(90)90493-w 1990

  70. [70]

    Particle multiplicities in p ¯p interactions at √s=540 GeV

    UA5 Collaboration, “Particle multiplicities in p ¯p interactions at √s=540 GeV”,Phys. Lett. B121(1983) 209,doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)90916-4

    work page doi:10.1016/0370-2693(83)90916-4 1983

  71. [71]

    Pseudorapidity distributions of charged particles produced in ¯pp interactions at √s=630 GeV and 1800 GeV

    CDF Collaboration, “Pseudorapidity distributions of charged particles produced in ¯pp interactions at √s=630 GeV and 1800 GeV”,Phys. Rev. D41(1990) 2330, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.41.2330

    work page doi:10.1103/physrevd.41.2330 1990

  72. [72]

    Charged particle multiplicity distributions in pp collisions at ISR Energies

    Aachen-CERN-Heidelberg-Munich Collaboration, “Charged particle multiplicity distributions in pp collisions at ISR Energies”,Nucl. Phys. B129(1977) 365, doi:10.1016/0550-3213(77)90122-5

    work page doi:10.1016/0550-3213(77)90122-5 1977

  73. [73]

    Charged-particle multiplicity measurement in proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 0.9 and 2.36 TeV with ALICE at LHC

    ALICE Collaboration, “Charged-particle multiplicity measurement in proton-proton collisions at √s=0.9 and 2.36 TeV with ALICE at LHC”,Eur. Phys. J. C68(2010) 89, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-010-1339-x,arXiv:1004.3034. 20 21 A The CMS Collaboration Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia A. Belyaev , A. Gevorgyan , A. Hayrapetyan, A. Tumasyan1 Marietta Bla...

    work page internal anchor Pith review Pith/arXiv arXiv doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-010-1339-x 2010