REVIEW 2 cited by
Comparing the MARTINI and CUJET models for jet-quenching: Medium modification of jets and jet substructure
Not yet reviewed by Pith; the record is open.
This paper has not been read by Pith yet. Machine review is queued; the pith claim, tier, and objections will appear here once it completes.
SPECIMEN: schema-true, not a live event
T0 review · schema-true
One-sentence machine reading of the paper's core claim.
pith:XXXXXXXX · record.json · timestamp
Signed reviews
abstract
Jets produced by the initial hard scattering in heavy ion collision events lose energy due to interactions with the color-deconfined medium formed around them: the quark-gluon plasma (QGP). Jet-medium interactions constitute an important theoretical and experimental field for studies of QGP, and various models with different assumptions have been proposed to describe them. A fair and direct comparison of these models requires that all other aspects of the simulation be fixed, which is achieved in this work by relying on the JETSCAPE framework. We employ JETSCAPE to directly and comprehensively compare two successful energy loss models: CUJET and MARTINI. We compare the models with the results of measurements of jet spectra and substructure observables. With the strong coupling tuned separately, we find that the two models broadly agree with each other in nuclear modification factors for charged hadrons and jets with cone size $R=0.4$. Systematic differences are reported in fragmentation functions, jet shape, and cone size dependent jet $R_{\mathrm{AA}}$.
Forward citations
Cited by 2 Pith papers
-
Hard Photon Triggered Jets in $p$-$p$ and $A$-$A$ Collisions
The multistage JETSCAPE model postdicts photon-triggered jet suppression and correlations at RHIC and LHC when bremsstrahlung photons are included, without any new parameter tuning.
-
Jets: Hard-soft correlation -- Theory overview
A review of recent theoretical progress on hard-soft correlations in jets, covering kinetic theory, x-scape-gim, TMD-based anisotropies, and color fluctuations.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.