Pith. sign in

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 1 cited by

A rotating-frame energy shift embedded in the Tsallis distribution makes inclusive hadron transverse-momentum spectra a direct probe of the quark–gluon plasma's global vorticity.

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

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-02 23:27 UTC pith:BDFGN2SK

load-bearing objection An intriguing but unreproducible vorticity extraction: the fit formula is never written, so the central numbers hang unsupported. the 4 major comments →

arxiv 2602.13618 v2 pith:BDFGN2SK submitted 2026-02-14 hep-ph hep-exhep-thnucl-exnucl-th

Probing Rotational Dynamics of Quark Gluon Plasma via Global Vorticity

Bhagyarathi Sahoo , Captain R. Singh , Raghunath Sahoo This is my paper
classification hep-ph hep-exhep-thnucl-exnucl-th PACS 25.75.-q
keywords global vorticityquark-gluon plasmatransverse momentum spectraspin-vorticity couplingTsallis non-extensive distributionhyperon polarizationvector meson spin alignmentrelativistic heavy-ion collisions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper argues that the global vorticity of the quark–gluon plasma can be measured without spin-polarization experiments, by fitting inclusive transverse-momentum spectra of hyperons and vector mesons with a thermodynamically consistent distribution modified for rigid rotation. If right, the fits show a rotation rate on the order of 10^22 per second, matching earlier values inferred from Lambda polarization, and reveal a clear dependence on hadron species, collision centrality, and beam energy. This would make ordinary unpolarized spectra a complementary, data-driven probe of the rotational state of QCD matter at freeze-out.

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that the global rotation of the deconfined fireball leaves a detectable imprint in the shape of unpolarized transverse-momentum spectra. Substituting E_lab − J·Ω for the single-particle energy in a thermodynamically consistent non-extensive (Tsallis) distribution, and fitting published spectra of eight hadron species across RHIC and LHC energies, yields a global vorticity Ω whose magnitude agrees with the ~10^22 s^-1 inferred from Λ and anti-Λ polarization. The fitted Ω varies with hadron species, centrality, and beam energy, and it behaves identically for particles and antiparticles, as expected for vorticity rather than magnetic-field coupling.

What carries the argument

The central object is the global angular velocity Ω of a rigidly rotating fireball. It enters through the rotating-frame energy shift E = E_lab − J·Ω, which couples a hadron's total angular momentum J to the rotation. The paper inserts this shift into the Tsallis non-extensive distribution (a two-parameter fit function that reproduces the exponential-to-power-law shape of hadron spectra) and treats Ω as a free parameter; the entire analysis hinges on this single energy shift being visible in inclusive spectra.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the entire fireball rotates as a rigid body with one angular velocity, so the same J·Ω shift distorts every hadron's spectrum; if the medium's rotation is not rigid, the fitted Ω is not a physical global vorticity.

What would settle it

Take one centrality and beam-energy bin, fit Ω from the pT spectrum of Λ, and compare it with Ω deduced from the measured Λ polarization in the same bin under the same non-relativistic thermal model; a disagreement beyond quoted uncertainties would falsify the spectral-shift interpretation. Alternatively, a viscous-hydrodynamic simulation yielding a space-averaged vorticity an order of magnitude below the fitted Ω would rule out the rigid-rotor assumption.

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

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

If this is right

  • Inclusive pT spectra, already measured for many species and centralities, become an independent cross-check of vorticity values obtained from hyperon polarization.
  • A particle-species-dependent Ω implies that estimates of global vorticity must account for freeze-out time and hadron structure, not just the common collective flow field.
  • The rise of Ω from RHIC to LHC energies provides a quantitative handle on how initial orbital angular momentum is converted into global rotation of the medium.
  • The extracted Ω values can serve as an input parameter for hydrodynamic and transport simulations of rotating QCD matter.
  • Extending the analysis to charmed vector mesons links global vorticity to the spin-alignment puzzle in the heavy-quark sector.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

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

  • If the spectral-shift interpretation is correct, Ω extracted from pT spectra should track the measured global polarization of Λ in the same centrality and energy bins; a bin-by-bin cross-check would be a direct test the paper does not report.
  • The species dependence could be turned into a freeze-out chronometer: comparing Ω across hadrons with different decoupling times would map how the vortical field evolves during the hadronic stage.
  • The method assumes a single global Ω, so the fitted numbers are best read as an effective rotation; comparing them against the full vorticity profile from viscous hydrodynamics would show how much of the local vortical structure survives averaging.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The paper proposes that the global vorticity of the quark-gluon plasma formed in relativistic heavy-ion collisions can be extracted from inclusive transverse-momentum (pT) spectra of hadrons. The idea is to use a thermodynamically consistent Tsallis distribution and modify the single-particle energy by a rigid-rotation shift E = E_lab − J·Ω (Eq. 3), then fit the resulting distribution to published STAR and ALICE pT spectra of hyperons and vector mesons at RHIC and LHC energies. Plotted results show Ω as a function of centrality and beam energy for many particle species, and the abstract claims consistency with polarization-derived vorticity. However, the rotation-modified fit formula is never written down, no fit parameters or goodness-of-fit are reported, and no baseline (Ω=0) comparison is shown.

Significance. If the proposed extraction were demonstrated, it would provide a complementary, data-driven probe of QGP rotation using inclusive pT spectra rather than spin-dependent observables, and the paper covers a broad and relevant dataset. The idea is interesting and the systematic exploration across species, centralities, and beam energies is commendable. However, the central method is missing from the manuscript: the fit formula is not given, the sensitivity of inclusive unpolarized spectra to Ω is not established, and the consistency claim with polarization measurements is not quantified. As it stands, the results are not reproducible and the existence of a measurable rotational imprint on the spectra is unproven.

major comments (4)
  1. [Section II, after Eq. (3)] The paper never writes the rotation-modified Tsallis distribution that is actually fitted. Eq. (2) is the standard Tsallis form with no Ω; Eq. (3) states the energy shift, but the substitutions E → E_lab − J·Ω (including spin and orbital contributions) and the resulting expression for d²N/(dpT dy) are not given. The figures in Section III therefore plot Ω values that cannot be reproduced or checked. This is load-bearing because the paper's central claim is that Ω is extracted from the pT spectra.
  2. [Section III, Figs. 2–6] No fit parameters, uncertainties, or goodness-of-fit measures are reported for the Ω extraction, and no Ω=0 baseline fit is shown. The text itself states (Section I, p.2) that "all fit parameters are obtained from the spectral analysis," so Ω is a fit parameter. Without a comparison of fit quality relative to the Ω=0 Tsallis baseline, the data do not demonstrate that rotation is required; changes in T, q, V, or dN/dy could absorb the effect.
  3. [Abstract and Section III.A.1] The claimed consistency with polarization-derived vorticity is not quantitative. No numerical values, uncertainties, or comparison plot are given, and the comparison is to values "deduced ... using statistical thermal models," which share the same rotating-frame assumption. Thus the agreement is not an independent test of the proposed model.
  4. [Section II, Eq. (3)] The sensitivity of unpolarized inclusive spectra to Ω is not established. For spin-1/2 and spin-1 particles, tracing over spin states of exp(β Ω·S) yields a scalar factor independent of pT; the orbital contribution Ω·(r×p) integrated over the fireball may be largely degenerate with a renormalization of T, q, or V. The paper should show explicitly, analytically or via a mock-data study, that the inclusive pT shape changes measurably as Ω varies before claiming a constraint.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Section II] Notation is inconsistent: "the L´evy–Tsallis distribution" and "Eq. 2" versus "Eq. (3)"; use consistent style and spell Lévy.
  2. [Figures 2–6] Axis labels appear broken in several panels, e.g., "10 −5 −0 5 10 (GeV) Ω". Please reformat the vertical-axis labels so the tick values and the symbol Ω are legible.
  3. [Section II, after Eq. (1)] The mapping between Eq. (1) and Eq. (2) via n → q/(q−1) and nC → T + m(q−1)/(q−1) should be stated more carefully; as written the connection is ambiguous.
  4. [Section III.B.2 and Fig. 6] In Fig. 6 the left-panel label reads "sNN = 2.76 GeV" but the text says TeV; correct the unit.
  5. [References] Reference [49] is an arXiv preprint; consider citing the published version if available. Also, the list contains a large number of self-citations (e.g., [19], [21], [22], [25]–[27]); please verify that all are necessary.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No circular derivation is demonstrable; the main shortfall is an omitted final fit formula, which is a reproducibility/falsifiability issue rather than a circularity.

full rationale

The paper does not, on its own equations, reduce a prediction to an input. Ω is admittedly a fit parameter ('Although all fit parameters are obtained from the spectral analysis, the discussion primarily focuses on the centrality and beam-energy dependence of the global vorticity parameter Ω,' Section I). The claimed consistency with polarization-derived vorticity ('the magnitude of Ω obtained from this spectral analysis is consistent, within uncertainties, with values inferred from Λ and Λ-bar spin polarization measurements using statistical thermal models in the non-relativistic limit [1],' Section III.A.1) is a comparison against an independent experimental dataset, not a quantity forced by the pT-spectrum fit. The self-citations ([19,21,22,25–27,44]) are used for background, spin-alignment phenomenology, or the standard Tsallis form; they are not invoked as a uniqueness theorem or as the source of the rotating-medium formula, which the paper presents as its own extension ('We extend this formulation by incorporating rigid-body rotation'). The real deficiency is that the combined rotating Tsallis formula is never written down, and no Ω=0 baseline comparison is shown, so the extraction is not falsifiable as presented. That is a serious reproducibility/correctness concern, but it is not a circularity: no equation in the paper exhibits an equivalence between the claimed output and an input by construction.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

5 free parameters · 4 axioms · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on fitting Ω as a free parameter in a modified Tsallis distribution that is never written down. The rigid-rotor assumption and the energy-shift formula are taken from textbook mechanics, but the paper provides no derivation that these apply to the freeze-out hypersurface of a heavy-ion collision. No new entities are introduced.

free parameters (5)
  • Global vorticity Ω = Not reported numerically; plotted in Figs. 2–6
    Central extracted quantity; a fit parameter of the unshown rotating Tsallis distribution, not a derived prediction.
  • Tsallis temperature T = Not reported
    Standard fit parameter in Eq. (2), fitted to pT spectra.
  • Non-extensive parameter q = Not reported
    Standard fit parameter in Eq. (2), fitted to pT spectra.
  • System volume V = Not reported
    Fit parameter in Eq. (2).
  • Normalization dN/dy = Not reported
    Overall yield fit parameter in Eqs. (1)–(2).
axioms (4)
  • domain assumption The Tsallis non-extensive distribution (Eq. 2) is the correct thermodynamically consistent description of freeze-out pT spectra.
    Used without derivation; standard in the authors' previous work.
  • ad hoc to paper The collision fireball freezes out as a rigid rotor characterized by a single global angular velocity Ω.
    Section II states 'rigid rotation with angular velocity Ω'; no hydrodynamic evidence for rigid-body rotation of the QGP.
  • domain assumption The rotating-frame energy shift E = E_lab − J·Ω (Eq. 3) measurably modifies inclusive pT spectra.
    Load-bearing; no explicit final formula or demonstration that pT spectra are sensitive to Ω.
  • domain assumption The non-relativistic limit suffices for comparing with Λ-polarization thermal-model values.
    Comparison in Section III uses the non-relativistic limit without justification for these collision energies.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 9963 in / 10890 out tokens · 97431 ms · 2026-08-02T23:27:10.257431+00:00 · methodology

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Probing Rotational Dynamics of Quark Gluon Plasma via Global Vorticity." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/BDFGN2SK

@misc{pith2026260213618,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Probing Rotational Dynamics of Quark Gluon Plasma via Global Vorticity},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/BDFGN2SK}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2602.13618}
}
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN
read the original abstract

The findings on the spin polarization of $\Lambda$, $\Xi$, and $\Omega$ hyperons and spin alignment of $K^{*0}$, $\phi$, and $D^{*+}$ mesons in relativistic heavy-ion collision experiments at the RHIC and LHC facilities propose the emergence of a strong vorticity field produced in these collisions. Contemplating the potential impact of vorticity on the space-time evolution of deconfined QCD matter and its freeze-out properties, we aim to investigate its characteristics within the medium. We introduce a complementary and data-driven approach to quantify the global vorticity field by extracting it directly from the transverse momentum spectra of produced hadrons. Employing the experimental data for $\Lambda$, $\Xi$, $\Omega$, $K^{*0}$, $K^{*\pm}$, $\phi$, $\rho$, and $D^{*+}$ at mid-rapidity in Au+Au and Pb+Pb collisions over a wide range of beam energies, $\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=7.7$ GeV-5.02 TeV, and centrality classes, we systematically examine spin-vorticity coupling in the medium. Our finding on the magnitude of the extracted vorticity is consistent with values deduced from $\Lambda$ and $\bar{\Lambda}$ polarization measurements using statistical thermal models under the non-relativistic limit. Notably, we observe a prominent particle-species dependence of the vorticity, as well as a non-trivial variation with collision centrality and beam energy. These results indicate that vorticity-driven spin phenomena are sensitive to hadron structure and freeze-out dynamics, providing new constraints on the rotational properties of the QCD matter.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2602.13618 by Bhagyarathi Sahoo, Captain R. Singh, Raghunath Sahoo.

Figure 1
Figure 1. Figure 1: FIG. 1. A pictorial representation of the magnitude of the [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. Figure 2: FIG. 2. The global vorticity Ω as a function of collision centrality for Λ, [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. Figure 3: FIG. 3. The global vorticity Ω as a function of collision cen [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_3.png] view at source ↗
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. The global vorticity Ω for [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_5.png] view at source ↗
Figure 6
Figure 6. Figure 6: FIG. 6. The left and right panel shows the variation of global vorticity Ω as a function of collision centrality for vector mesons [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_6.png] view at source ↗

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. Vorticity-induced modifications of chemical freeze-out in heavy-ion collisions

    hep-ph 2026-03 conditional novelty 5.0

    Global rotation shifts the HRG chemical freeze-out curve to lower T and makes particle yield ratios more sensitive probes of vorticity than conserved-charge cumulant ratios.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

66 extracted references · 3 linked inside Pith · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    The experimental data used in the present study are taken from Ref

    Global vorticity at RHIC energies Figure 2 shows the centrality dependence of the ex- tracted global vorticity Ω for Λ, ¯Λ, Ξ−, ¯Ξ+, Ω−, and ¯Ω+ hyperons produced in Au+Au collisions at mid-rapidity at √sNN = 7.7–64 GeV. The experimental data used in the present study are taken from Ref. [54, 55]. For Λ and ¯Λ hyperons, Ω decreases toward peripheral colli...

  2. [2]

    Global vorticity at LHC energies At LHC energies, experimental data used for the anal- ysis are taken from Ref. [56]. Figure 3 illustrate the centrality dependence of Ω for Λ, Ξ −, ¯Ξ+, Ω −, and ¯Ω+ hyperons produced in Pb+Pb collisions at √sNN = 2.76 TeV at mid rapidity. For Λ and Ξ− hyperons, the central- ity dependence of Ω is significantly weakened, r...

  3. [3]

    The experimental data are taken from Ref

    Global vorticity at RHIC energies We analyze thep T-spectra ofK ∗0 andϕmesons mea- sured by the STAR collaboration in Au+Au collisions at mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5) using the modified Tsallis distri- bution for various centrality classes and center-of-mass energies √sNN = 7.7–39 GeV. The experimental data are taken from Ref. [57]. Figure 5 presents the centra...

  4. [4]

    The left panel of Fig

    Global vorticity at LHC energies We further extend the analysis to LHC energies by studying the transverse momentum (p T) spectra ofK ∗0, K ∗±,ϕ,ρ, andD ∗+ mesons produced in Pb+Pb colli- sions at mid-rapidity (|y|<0.5) and measured by the AL- ICE collaboration. The left panel of Fig. 6 presents the centrality dependence of the extracted global vorticity ...

    2021

  5. [5]

    Adamczyket al.[STAR Collaboration], Nature548, 62 (2017)

    L. Adamczyket al.[STAR Collaboration], Nature548, 62 (2017)

    2017

  6. [6]

    Adamet al.[STAR Collaboration], Phys

    J. Adamet al.[STAR Collaboration], Phys. Rev. C98, 014910 (2018)

    2018

  7. [7]

    Adamet al.[STAR Collaboration], Phys

    J. Adamet al.[STAR Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 123, 132301 (2019)

    2019

  8. [8]

    Adamet al.[STAR Collaboration], Phys

    J. Adamet al.[STAR Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 162301 (2021)

    2021

  9. [9]

    Acharyaet al.[ALICE Collaboration], Phys

    S. Acharyaet al.[ALICE Collaboration], Phys. Rev. C 101(2020) no.4, 044611 [erratum: Phys. Rev. C105 (2022) no.2, 029902]

    2020

  10. [10]

    Acharyaet al.[ALICE Collaboration], Phys

    S. Acharyaet al.[ALICE Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett.128, 172005 (2022)

    2022

  11. [11]

    M. S. Abdallahet al.[STAR Collaboration], Nature614, 244 (2023)

    2023

  12. [12]

    Abdulhamidet al.[STAR Collaboration], Phys

    M. Abdulhamidet al.[STAR Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 202301 (2023)

    2023

  13. [13]

    Becattini and M

    F. Becattini and M. A. Lisa, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 70, 395 (2020)

    2020

  14. [14]

    H. Li, L. G. Pang, Q. Wang and X. L. Xia, Phys. Rev. C 96, 054908 (2017)

    2017

  15. [15]

    B. Fu, K. Xu, X. G. Huang and H. Song, Phys. Rev. C 103, 024903 (2021)

    2021

  16. [16]

    and Csernai, L.P., Eur

    Xie, Y., Wang, D. and Csernai, L.P., Eur. Phys. J. C80, 39 (2020)

    2020

  17. [17]

    X. L. Xia, H. Li, Z. B. Tang and Q. Wang, Phys. Rev. C 98, 024905 (2018)

    2018

  18. [18]

    Z. T. Liang and X. N. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett.94, 102301 (2005). [erratum: Phys. Rev. Lett.96, 039901 (2006)]

    2005

  19. [19]

    Jiang, Z

    Y. Jiang, Z. W. Lin and J. Liao, Phys. Rev. C94, 044910 (2016);95, 049904(E) (2017)

    2016

  20. [20]

    B. Betz, M. Gyulassy and G. Torrieri, Phys. Rev. C76, 044901 (2007)

    2007

  21. [21]

    Becattini and I

    F. Becattini and I. Karpenko, Phys. Rev. Lett.120, 012302 (2018)

    2018

  22. [22]

    L. G. Pang, H. Petersen, Q. Wang and X. N. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett.117, 192301 (2016)

    2016

  23. [23]

    Sahoo, C

    B. Sahoo, C. R. Singh and R. Sahoo, Phys. Scripta100, 065310 (2025)

    2025

  24. [24]

    Einstein and W

    A. Einstein and W. J. de Haas, Verh. Dtsch. Phys. Ges. 17, 152 (1915)

    1915

  25. [25]

    Sahoo, C

    B. Sahoo, C. R. Singh and R. Sahoo, Eur. Phys. J. C85, 580 (2025)

    2025

  26. [26]

    Sahoo, C

    B. Sahoo, C. R. Singh, D. Sahu, R. Sahoo and J. e. Alam, Eur. Phys. J. C83, 873 (2023)

    2023

  27. [27]

    K. K. Pradhan, B. Sahoo, D. Sahu and R. Sahoo, Eur. Phys. J. C84, 936 (2024)

    2024

  28. [28]

    C. W. Aung, A. Dwibedi, J. Dey and S. Ghosh, Phys. Rev. C109, 2024 (2024)

    2024

  29. [29]

    Sahoo, C

    B. Sahoo, C. R. Singh and R. Sahoo, [arXiv:2506.09405]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  30. [30]

    Sahoo, C

    B. Sahoo, C. R. Singh and R. Sahoo, [arXiv:2512.18728]

    arXiv

  31. [31]

    Sahoo, K

    B. Sahoo, K. K. Pradhan, D. Sahu and R. Sahoo, [arXiv:2507.03708]

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  32. [32]

    Becattini, J

    F. Becattini, J. Liao and M. A. Lisa, Strongly Interacting Matter under Rotation, Springer, (2021)

    2021

  33. [33]

    et al., Astrophys

    Komm, R. et al., Astrophys. J. 667, 571 (2007)

    2007

  34. [34]

    Perry, C. A., Int. J. Clim. 26, 207–218 (2006). 8

    2006

  35. [35]

    D. S. Choi, D. Banfield, P. J. Gierasch and A. P. Show- man, Icarus188, 35 (2007)

    2007

  36. [36]

    et al., Mon

    Wurman, J. et al., Mon. Weath. Rev. 135, 2392–2405 (2007)

    2007

  37. [37]

    et al., Sci

    Meuel, T. et al., Sci. Rep. 3, 1 (2013)

    2013

  38. [38]

    Donnelly, R. Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 25, 325 (1993)

    1993

  39. [39]

    Gomez, L. F. et al., Science 345, 906 (2014)

    2014

  40. [40]

    J. R. Ellis and K. A. Olive, Nature303, 679 (1983)

    1983

  41. [41]

    Thompson, M. J. et.al., Annual Review of Astronomy and Astrophysics, 41, 599–643 (2003)

    2003

  42. [42]

    J. W. T. Hessels et al., Science 311, 1901 (2006)

    1901

  43. [43]

    J. E. McClintock, R. Shafee, R. Narayan, R. A. Remil- lard, S. W. Davis and L. X. Li, Astrophys. J.652, 518 (2006)

    2006

  44. [44]

    S. Ryu, V. Jupic and C. Shen, Phys. Rev. C104, 054908 (2021)

    2021

  45. [45]

    Z. F. Jiang, X. Y. Wu, S. Cao and B. W. Zhang, Phys. Rev. C108, 064904 (2023)

    2023

  46. [46]

    Bhattacharyya, J

    T. Bhattacharyya, J. Cleymans, A. Khuntia, P. Pareek and R. Sahoo, Eur. Phys. J. A52, 30 (2016)

    2016

  47. [47]

    Cleymans and D

    J. Cleymans and D. Worku, J. Phys. G39, 025006 (2012)

    2012

  48. [48]

    Sahoo, S

    B. Sahoo, S. Deb and R. Sahoo, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E33, 2450055 (2024)

    2024

  49. [49]

    B. I. Abelevet al.[STAR Collaboration], Phys. Rev. C 75, 064901 (2007)

    2007

  50. [50]

    Aamodtet al.[ALICE Collaboration], Eur

    K. Aamodtet al.[ALICE Collaboration], Eur. Phys. J. C71, 1655 (2011)

    2011

  51. [51]

    Abelevet al.[ALICE Collaboration], Phys

    B. Abelevet al.[ALICE Collaboration], Phys. Lett. B 712, 309 (2012)

    2012

  52. [52]

    Andronic, P

    A. Andronic, P. Braun-Munzinger, K. Redlich and J. Stachel, Nature561, 321 (2018)

    2018

  53. [53]

    Tsallis,arXiv:1403.5425v1

    C. Tsallis,arXiv:1403.5425v1

    Pith/arXiv arXiv

  54. [54]

    Cleymans, G

    J. Cleymans, G. I. Lykasov, A. S. Parvan, A. S. Sorin, O. V. Teryaev and D. Worku, Phys. Lett. B723, 351 (2013)

    2013

  55. [55]

    L. D. Landau and E. M. Lifshitz, Mechanics, 3rd ed., Course of Theoretical Physics Vol. 1 (Butterworth- Heinemann, Oxford, 1976)

    1976

  56. [56]

    Mashhoon, Phys

    B. Mashhoon, Phys. Rev. Lett.61, 2639 (1988)

    1988

  57. [57]

    F. W. Hehl and W. T. Ni, Phys. Rev. D42, 2045 (1990)

    2045

  58. [58]

    Adamet al.[STAR Collaboration], Phys

    J. Adamet al.[STAR Collaboration], Phys. Rev. C102, 034909 (2020)

    2020

  59. [59]

    M. M. Aggarwalet al.[STAR Collaboration], Phys. Rev. C83, 024901 (2011). [erratum: Phys. Rev. C107, 049903 (2023).]

    2011

  60. [60]

    B. B. Abelevet al.[ALICE Collaboration], Phys. Lett. B728, 216 (2014). [erratum: Phys. Lett. B734, 409 (2014).]

    2014

  61. [61]

    Abdallahet al.[STAR Collaboration], Phys

    M. Abdallahet al.[STAR Collaboration], Phys. Rev. C 107, 034907 (2023)

    2023

  62. [62]

    B. B. Abelevet al.[ALICE Collaboration], Phys. Rev. C 91, 024609 (2015)

    2015

  63. [63]

    Acharyaet al.[ALICE Collaboration], Phys

    S. Acharyaet al.[ALICE Collaboration], Phys. Rev. C 99, 064901 (2019)

    2019

  64. [64]

    Acharyaet al.[ALICE Collaboration], Phys

    S. Acharyaet al.[ALICE Collaboration], Phys. Rev. C 106, 034907 (2022)

    2022

  65. [65]

    Acharyaet al.[ALICE Collaboration], Phys

    S. Acharyaet al.[ALICE Collaboration], Phys. Rev. C 109, 044902 (2024)

    2024

  66. [66]

    Acharyaet al.[ALICE Collaboration], JHEP10, 174 (2018)

    S. Acharyaet al.[ALICE Collaboration], JHEP10, 174 (2018)

    2018