REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 77 references
Evidence for sequential $\Upsilon$(nS) suppression in light ion collisions
T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-02 · deepseek-v4-flash
Pith's one-line read The paper reports the first measurements of the three lowest Upsilon states in oxygen-oxygen collisions and the two lowest in neon-neon collisions, finding that the excited states are strongly suppressed relative to the ground state, with t
desk verdict First Upsilon(nS) double ratios in OO and NeNe are a solid new data point; the sequential-suppression interpretation is a conditional because the CNM cancellation claim is under-supported. read the letter →
The pith
A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.
The reading
What carries the argument
The key observable is the double ratio D_nm = (Y(nS)/Y(mS))_AA / (Y(nS)/Y(mS))_pp, where n,m denote the Upsilon states. Constructing the ratio of the nucleus-nucleus single ratio to the proton-proton single ratio cancels experimental uncertainties and cold-nuclear-matter effects that affect all Upsilon states alike, leaving a clean probe of state-dependent, final-state suppression. The hierarchy of binding energies — 1.10, 0.54, and 0.20 GeV for the 1S, 2S, and 3S states — is what makes 'sequential' suppression observable: the more weakly bound states should dissolve earlier in a hot medium.
What would settle it
A measurement of the Upsilon(nS) double ratios in proton-lead (or proton-oxygen) collisions at the same energy, where a hot medium is less likely, that shows the same deficit would falsify the final-state interpretation. More straightforwardly, if the D32 significance drops below 3 sigma with additional oxygen-oxygen data, the claimed 'first evidence' for sequential suppression would be weakened.
Extended reading notes
Core claim
The central claim is that in oxygen-oxygen collisions the double ratios D21 = 0.664 ± 0.055 ± 0.007, D31 = 0.392 ± 0.077 ± 0.023, and D32 = 0.59 ± 0.12 ± 0.04 are all below unity, with D21 and D31 deviating by more than five standard deviations and D32 by 3.2 standard deviations. In neon-neon collisions, D21 = 0.27 ± 0.12 ± 0.01 is even lower. The authors argue that these ratios, which cancel common uncertainties and initial-state effects, isolate final-state dissociation of the more weakly bound excited states, providing evidence for sequential suppression in systems with on average about ten participating nucleons.
Load-bearing premise
The load-bearing assumption is that cold-nuclear-matter effects and feed-down contributions affect all three Upsilon states equally, so that any deficit in the double ratios can be attributed to final-state medium effects; if these effects are state-dependent, the observed pattern could arise without a quark-gluon plasma.
Editorial extensions
If this is right
- If the claim holds, quark-gluon plasma signatures do not require large fireballs; systems with only about 10 participating nucleons can produce the same sequential pattern as lead-lead.
- The compatibility of D32 between oxygen-oxygen and lead-lead collisions suggests that the dissociation of the most weakly bound state is governed by similar medium conditions, not by total volume.
- The measured suppression is stronger than current hydrodynamic-plus-dissociation model predictions, indicating that the underlying dissociation mechanisms are not fully captured.
- The neon-neon D21 value being lower than oxygen-oxygen provides a new handle on how suppression scales with system size among light ions.
- These results provide a bridge between proton-lead and lead-lead measurements, constraining models of bottomonium production across system sizes.
Reading between the lines
- If state-dependent cold-nuclear-matter effects (e.g., different nPDF modifications or feed-down for excited states) are later found to be sizable, the double-ratio interpretation would need revision; a measurement of the same states in proton-nucleus collisions at 5.36 TeV would provide a direct check.
- The apparent pT-independence of D32, if confirmed with more statistics, would suggest that the suppression is dominated by the medium's early-time temperature rather than by energy-loss or formation-time effects.
- One could test the 'small-system QGP' interpretation by measuring elliptic flow of the Upsilon states themselves in oxygen-oxygen collisions; a positive signal would tie the suppression to a thermalized medium.
Signed reviews
Editorial analysis
A structured set of objections, weighed in public.
Referee Report
Summary. The manuscript reports the first measurements of the Upsilon(1S), Upsilon(2S), and Upsilon(3S) states in oxygen-oxygen collisions and of the Upsilon(1S,2S) states in neon-neon collisions at sqrt(s_NN)=5.36 TeV, using a pp reference at the same energy. The analysis is based on dimuon invariant mass fits, acceptance/efficiency corrections, and standard systematic variations. The central results are the double ratios D21=0.664+/-0.055+/-0.007, D31=0.392+/-0.077+/-0.023, and D32=0.59+/-0.12+/-0.04 in OO, and D21=0.27+/-0.12+/-0.01 in NeNe. The paper interprets the OO ratios, especially the 3.2-sigma D32 deficit, as evidence for sequential Upsilon(nS) suppression in small symmetric collision systems, compares the results with pPb and PbPb measurements and with the SHINCHON model, and reports multiplicity and pT differential trends.
Significance. If the interpretation holds, the OO D32 deficit is the first indication that Upsilon(3S) is suppressed relative to Upsilon(2S) in light-ion collisions, extending the sequential-suppression pattern to systems with Npart of order 10. The experimental analysis is careful, the values are stated with separated statistical and systematic uncertainties, and the quoted significances are internally consistent with the reported numbers: D21 is about 6.1 sigma, D31 about 7.6 sigma, and D32 about 3.2 sigma below unity. The paper is appropriately cautious in calling D32 'evidence' rather than 'observation.' The primary weakness is that the final-state interpretation rests on the premise that initial-state nuclear effects cancel in D_nm because they affect all Upsilon(nS) states similarly; this premise is not quantitatively supported and is load-bearing for the central claim.
major comments (3)
- [Section 2, D_nm definition] The statement that D_nm and S_nm cancel initial-state nuclear effects 'expected to modify all of the Upsilon(nS) states similarly [49]' is load-bearing for the conclusion. Reference [49] is a coherent-photoproduction measurement and does not address hadroproduction cold-nuclear-matter effects. nPDF shadowing/anti-shadowing, coherent energy loss, and state-dependent feed-down can leave a state-dependent contribution in D_nm. The paper itself later, in the multiplicity paragraph, acknowledges 'possible differences in feed-down contributions.' Since D32 is only 3.2 sigma from unity, a modest state-dependent CNM correction could move it to unity. Please provide a quantitative bound on state-dependent CNM (e.g., from pPb double ratios or nPDF calculations) or explicitly weaken the final-state conclusion.
- [Figure 3 / SHINCHON comparison] The SHINCHON comparison is invoked as support for a final-state interpretation, but the model description given in the text contains no CNM component. The paper states that the calculation 'significantly underestimates the measured suppression,' but the gap is of the same order as the size of a CNM contribution that would be needed to explain the data. This comparison therefore does not close the loophole identified in the D_nm definition. The summary statement that these observables 'isolate final-state medium effects' is too strong. The manuscript should either add state-dependent CNM to the model comparison or state that the data are consistent with, but do not uniquely require, QGP-driven sequential suppression.
- [Results, NeNe D21] The measured NeNe D21 = 0.27 +/- 0.12 +/- 0.01 is quoted as 3.0 standard deviations lower than the OO D21 = 0.664. This is a striking difference between two small symmetric systems and is not discussed beyond the quoted significance. If taken at face value it complicates the 'clear hierarchy' in Fig. 2 and the system-size narrative. The authors should quantify the consistency between OO and NeNe with correlated systematics treated explicitly, and discuss whether the difference bears on the state-independence assumption for CNM effects.
minor comments (4)
- [Abstract] The abstract says 'The Upsilon(2S)/Upsilon(1S) ratio is found to be significantly below the measured pp reference value' without specifying the collision system. Since the OO and NeNe values differ substantially, this should be made explicit for both systems.
- [Figure 3 caption] The text says the right panel presents pT-differential D21, D31, and D32, but the figure caption only names D32. Please make the caption consistent with the content of the panel.
- [Systematics paragraph] The systematic uncertainty ranges are useful, but a compact table listing all integrated and differential D_nm and S_nm values with statistical and systematic uncertainties would improve readability and reproducibility.
- [NeNe significance] The 3.0-standard-deviation difference between NeNe and OO D21 should state explicitly how the uncertainty was combined (statistical and systematic, with or without correlations between the two measurements) so that the claim is reproducible.
Circularity Check
No significant circularity: the double ratios are direct data ratios against an external pp baseline, and no fitted parameter is relabeled as a prediction.
full rationale
The derivation chain is self-contained and non-circular. The central observables D_nm are defined directly as ratios of measured yields in AA collisions divided by the same ratio measured in a separately collected pp reference at the same collision energy (Eq. 1), so they are raw data products rather than outputs of a fitted model. The pp baseline is an external reference, not constructed from the AA data, and the paper explicitly reports the statistical and systematic uncertainties propagating from both samples. The claim of sequential suppression is a significance statement about the measured D21, D31, and D32 values being below unity, not a prediction obtained from a parameter fitted to those values. The only model comparison, SHINCHON, is an independent calculation that is compared with, not fitted to, the data; the model significantly underestimates the measured suppression, which is the opposite of a circular agreement. The assumption that initial-state nuclear effects modify all Upsilon(nS) states similarly is a physical premise used in interpreting the double ratio, but it is not derived from the data it is used to explain; the paper even acknowledges possible feed-down differences in the multiplicity-dependent discussion and notes that event activity alone does not fully determine suppression. The in-text caveats are therefore explicit assumptions, not hidden equivalences. There are numerous self-citations, but they are used for apparatus, previous measurements, and luminosity, not as the load-bearing justification for the central result. The cited reference [49] attached to the CNM-cancellation sentence concerns coherent Upsilon(1S) photoproduction and does not by itself establish the state-independence premise; this is a weakness in the support for a stated assumption, not a circular step. No equation reduces to another by construction, and no fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, so the circularity score is 0.
Assumptions & free parameters
assumptions (5)
- domain assumption Cold nuclear matter and initial-state effects modify all Upsilon(nS) yields similarly, so they cancel in the double ratios D_nm.
- domain assumption Upsilon production in simulations can be treated as unpolarized, with pT spectra reweighted to data.
- domain assumption Detector simulation (GEANT4), event generators (PYTHIA8, HIJING), and tag-and-probe scale factors accurately describe dimuon trigger, reconstruction, and selection efficiencies.
- domain assumption The background shape (error function times exponential, or Chebyshev alternative) correctly models the continuum under the Upsilon resonances.
- domain assumption The MC Glauber model provides a valid estimate of Npart for OO and NeNe collisions.
Cite this review
Pith. "Pith review of Evidence for sequential $\Upsilon$(nS) suppression in light ion collisions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/HXKL4SDQ
@misc{pith2026260713758,
author = {Pith},
title = {Pith review of: Evidence for sequential $\Upsilon$(nS) suppression in light ion collisions},
year = {2026},
howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/HXKL4SDQ}},
note = {Machine review of arXiv:2607.13758}
}
abstract
Bound states of heavy quark-antiquark pairs, known as quarkonia, have long been regarded as particularly sensitive probes of the quark-gluon plasma (QGP). Comparing quarkonium yields in collisions of heavy nuclei, such as gold or lead, with a proton-proton (pp) reference reveals a characteristic pattern of sequential suppression, in which weakly-bound excited states are more strongly suppressed than the ground states. We report the first measurements of the three lowest mass $\mathrm{S}$-wave vector bottomonium resonances, the ground state $\Upsilon$(1S) and the excited states $\Upsilon$(2S) and $\Upsilon$(3S), in oxygen-oxygen collisions at a center-of-mass energy per nucleon pair of $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$ = 5.36 TeV. Measurements of the yields of the $\Upsilon$(1S) and $\Upsilon$(2S) resonances in neon-neon collisions, at the same $\sqrt{s_\mathrm{NN}}$, are also presented. The $\Upsilon$(2S)/$\Upsilon$(1S) ratio is found to be significantly below the measured pp reference value, and the $\Upsilon$(3S)/$\Upsilon$(1S) ratio shows an even larger reduction. The significance of the relative $\Upsilon$(3S) to $\Upsilon$(2S) suppression exceeds three standard deviations. These results provide evidence for the sequential suppression of $\Upsilon$(nS) states in light ion collisions, similar to observations made in lead-lead and gold-gold collisions, generally attributed to the presence of a QGP medium.
Figures
Reference graph
Works this paper leans on
-
[49]
Observation of nuclear suppression in coherentΥ (1S) photoproduction off heavy nuclei at the LHC
CMS Collaboration, “Observation of nuclear suppression in coherentΥ (1S) photoproduction off heavy nuclei at the LHC”, 2026.arXiv:2604.05814. Submitted to Phys. Rev. Lett
arXiv 2026
-
[1]
Personal memories of 50 years of quarkonia
J. Ellis, “Personal memories of 50 years of quarkonia”,Nucl. Phys. B1018(2025) 117062, doi:10.1016/j.nuclphysb.2025.117062,arXiv:2506.10643
arXiv 2025
-
[2]
The search for the quark-gluon plasma
J. W. Harris and B. Muller, “The search for the quark-gluon plasma”,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.46(1996) 71,doi:10.1146/annurev.nucl.46.1.71, arXiv:hep-ph/9602235
arXiv 1996
-
[3]
J/ψsuppression by quark-gluon plasma formation
T. Matsui and H. Satz, “J/ψsuppression by quark-gluon plasma formation”,Phys. Lett. B 178(1986) 416,doi:10.1016/0370-2693(86)91404-8
-
[4]
Quarkonia and deconfined quark-gluon matter in heavy ion collisions
A. Andronic and R. Arnaldi, “Quarkonia and deconfined quark-gluon matter in heavy ion collisions”,Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci.75(2025) 351, doi:10.1146/annurev-nucl-121423-101041,arXiv:2501.08290. 8
arXiv 2025
-
[5]
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
arXiv 2022
-
[6]
Enhanced J/ψproduction in deconfined quark matter
R. L. Thews, M. Schroedter, and J. Rafelski, “Enhanced J/ψproduction in deconfined quark matter”,Phys. Rev. C63(2001) 054905,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.63.054905, arXiv:hep-ph/0007323
arXiv 2001
-
[7]
(Non)thermal aspects of charmonium production and a new look at J/ψsuppression
P . Braun-Munzinger and J. Stachel, “(Non)thermal aspects of charmonium production and a new look at J/ψsuppression”,Phys. Lett. B490(2000) 196, doi:10.1016/S0370-2693(00)00991-6,arXiv:nucl-th/0007059
arXiv 2000
Show all 77 references
-
[8]
Color screening and regeneration of bottomonia in high-energy heavy ion collisions
X. Du, M. He, and R. Rapp, “Color screening and regeneration of bottomonia in high-energy heavy ion collisions”,Phys. Rev. C96(2017) 054901, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.96.054901,arXiv:1706.08670
2017 arXiv
-
[9]
Coupled Boltzmann transport equations of heavy quarks and quarkonia in quark-gluon plasma
X. Yao et al., “Coupled Boltzmann transport equations of heavy quarks and quarkonia in quark-gluon plasma”,JHEP01(2021) 046,doi:10.1007/JHEP01(2021)046, arXiv:2004.06746
2021 arXiv
-
[10]
Regeneration of bottomonia in an open quantum systems approach
N. Brambilla et al., “Regeneration of bottomonia in an open quantum systems approach”,Phys. Rev. D108(2023) L011502,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.108.L011502, arXiv:2302.11826
2023 arXiv
-
[11]
Bottomonium transport in a strongly coupled quark-gluon plasma
B. Wu and R. Rapp, “Bottomonium transport in a strongly coupled quark-gluon plasma”, Phys. Lett. B873(2026) 140223,doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2026.140223, arXiv:2508.20995
2026
-
[12]
Hadronic versus partonic J/ψproduction in the statistical hadronization model
P . B. Bahavar, J. Uphoff, and C. Greiner, “Hadronic versus partonic J/ψproduction in the statistical hadronization model”,Phys. Rev. C90(2014) 061901, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.90.061901,arXiv:1404.4517
2014 arXiv
-
[13]
Statistical hadronization of b quarks in PbPb collisions at LHC energy: a case for partial equilibration of b quarks?
A. Andronic, P . Braun-Munzinger, K. Redlich, and J. Stachel, “Statistical hadronization of b quarks in PbPb collisions at LHC energy: a case for partial equilibration of b quarks?”, Acta Phys. Polon. Supp.16(2023) 1,doi:10.5506/APhysPolBSupp.16.1-A107, arXiv:2209.14562
2023 arXiv
-
[14]
Comparative study of quarkonium transport in hot QCD matter
A. Andronic et al., “Comparative study of quarkonium transport in hot QCD matter”, Eur. Phys. J. A60(2024) 88,doi:10.1140/epja/s10050-024-01306-6, arXiv:2402.04366
2024 arXiv
-
[15]
Review of particle physics
Particle Data Group, S. Navas et al., “Review of particle physics”,Phys. Rev. D110 (2024) 030001,doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.030001
2024 doi
-
[16]
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
2025 arXiv
-
[17]
Indications of suppression of excitedΥstates in PbPb collisions at√sNN =2.76 TeV
CMS Collaboration, “Indications of suppression of excitedΥstates in PbPb collisions at√sNN =2.76 TeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.107(2011) 052302, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.107.052302,arXiv:1105.4894
2011 arXiv
-
[18]
Observation of sequentialΥsuppression in PbPb collisions
CMS Collaboration, “Observation of sequentialΥsuppression in PbPb collisions”,Phys. Rev. Lett.109(2012) 222301,doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.109.222301, arXiv:1208.2826. [Erratum:doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.199903]. References 9
2012 arXiv
-
[19]
Measurement of nuclear modification factors ofΥ (1S),Υ (2S), and Υ(3S) mesons in PbPb collisions at √sNN =5.02 TeV
CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of nuclear modification factors ofΥ (1S),Υ (2S), and Υ(3S) mesons in PbPb collisions at √sNN =5.02 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B790(2019) 270, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2019.01.006,arXiv:1805.09215
2019 arXiv
-
[20]
Observation of theΥ (3S) meson and suppression ofΥstates in PbPb collisions at √sNN =5.02 TeV
CMS Collaboration, “Observation of theΥ (3S) meson and suppression ofΥstates in PbPb collisions at √sNN =5.02 TeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.133(2024) 022302, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.133.022302,arXiv:2303.17026
2024 arXiv
-
[21]
Υproduction and nuclear modification at forward rapidity in PbPb collisions at √sNN =5.02 TeV
ALICE Collaboration, “Υproduction and nuclear modification at forward rapidity in PbPb collisions at √sNN =5.02 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B822(2021) 136579, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2021.136579,arXiv:2011.05758
2021
-
[22]
Production ofΥ(nS) mesons in PbPb and pp collisions at 5.02 TeV
ATLAS Collaboration, “Production ofΥ(nS) mesons in PbPb and pp collisions at 5.02 TeV”,Phys. Rev. C107(2023) 054912,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.107.054912, arXiv:2205.03042
2023 arXiv
-
[23]
Observation of sequentialΥsuppression in AuAu collisions at√sNN =200 GeV with the STAR experiment
STAR Collaboration, “Observation of sequentialΥsuppression in AuAu collisions at√sNN =200 GeV with the STAR experiment”,Phys. Rev. Lett.130(2023) 112301, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.130.112301,arXiv:2207.06568
2023
-
[24]
Υproduction in pPb collisions at √sNN =8.16 TeV
ALICE Collaboration, “Υproduction in pPb collisions at √sNN =8.16 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B 806(2020) 135486,doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2020.135486,arXiv:1910.14405
2020
-
[25]
Measurement of quarkonium production in pPb and pp collisions at 5.02 TeV with the ATLAS detector
ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurement of quarkonium production in pPb and pp collisions at 5.02 TeV with the ATLAS detector”,Eur. Phys. J. C78(2018) 171, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-018-5624-4,arXiv:1709.03089
2018 arXiv
-
[26]
Nuclear modification ofΥstates in pPb collisions at√sNN =5.02 TeV
CMS Collaboration, “Nuclear modification ofΥstates in pPb collisions at√sNN =5.02 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B835(2022) 137397, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2022.137397,arXiv:2202.11807
2022
-
[27]
Study ofΥproduction in pPb collisions at √sNN =8.16 TeV
LHCb Collaboration, “Study ofΥproduction in pPb collisions at √sNN =8.16 TeV”, JHEP11(2018) 194,doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2018)194,arXiv:1810.07655. [Erratum:doi:10.1007/JHEP02(2020)093]
2018
-
[28]
Bottomonia in the quark gluon plasma and their production at RHIC and LHC
A. Emerick, X. Zhao, and R. Rapp, “Bottomonia in the quark gluon plasma and their production at RHIC and LHC”,Eur. Phys. J. A48(2012) 72, doi:10.1140/epja/i2012-12072-y,arXiv:1111.6537
2012 arXiv
-
[29]
Does quarkonia suppression serve as a probe for the deconfinement in small systems?
P . Bagchi, A. Das, and A. P . Mishra, “Does quarkonia suppression serve as a probe for the deconfinement in small systems?”,Phys. Rev. D110(2024) 014017, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.110.014017,arXiv:2310.12267
2024 arXiv
-
[30]
Possible formation of QGP-droplets in proton-proton collisions at the CERN Large Hadron Collider
R. Sahoo, “Possible formation of QGP-droplets in proton-proton collisions at the CERN Large Hadron Collider”,AAPPS Bull.29(2019) 16, doi:10.22661/AAPPSBL.2019.29.4.16,arXiv:1908.10566
2019 arXiv
-
[31]
Smallest drop of QGP: thermodynamic properties of pPb collisions
F. G. Gardim, R. Krupczak, and T. N. da Silva, “Smallest drop of QGP: thermodynamic properties of pPb collisions”,Phys. Rev. C109(2024) 014904, doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.109.014904,arXiv:2212.11710
2024 arXiv
-
[32]
Searching for QGP droplets with high-pT hadrons and heavy flavor
W. Ke and I. Vitev, “Searching for QGP droplets with high-pT hadrons and heavy flavor”, Phys. Rev. C107(2023) 064903,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.107.064903, arXiv:2204.00634. 10
2023 arXiv
-
[33]
Disentangling centrality bias and final-state effects in the production of high-pT neutral pions using direct photon in d+Au collisions at√sNN =200 GeV
PHENIX Collaboration, “Disentangling centrality bias and final-state effects in the production of high-pT neutral pions using direct photon in d+Au collisions at√sNN =200 GeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.134(2025) 022302, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.134.022302,arXiv:2303.12899
2025
-
[34]
Is bottomonium suppression in proton-nucleus and nucleus-nucleus collisions at LHC energies due to the same effects?
E. G. Ferreiro and J.-P . Lansberg, “Is bottomonium suppression in proton-nucleus and nucleus-nucleus collisions at LHC energies due to the same effects?”,JHEP10(2018) 094,doi:10.1007/JHEP10(2018)094,arXiv:1804.04474. [Erratum: doi:10.1007/JHEP03(2019)063]
2018 arXiv
-
[35]
Event activity dependence of relative Y(nS) production in pPb collisions at 8.16 TeV
CMS Collaboration, “Event activity dependence of relative Y(nS) production in pPb collisions at 8.16 TeV”, CMS Physics Analysis Summary CMS-PAS-HIN-25-005, 2026
2026
-
[36]
Charting the luminosity capabilities of the CERN Large Hadron Collider with various nuclear species
E. Waagaard et al., “Charting the luminosity capabilities of the CERN Large Hadron Collider with various nuclear species”,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A1083(2026) 171118, doi:10.1016/j.nima.2025.171118,arXiv:2508.19653
2026
-
[37]
Opportunities of OO and pO collisions at the LHC
J. Brewer, A. Mazeliauskas, and W. van der Schee, “Opportunities of OO and pO collisions at the LHC”, inOpportunities of OO and pO collisions at the LHC. 2021. arXiv:2103.01939
2021 arXiv
-
[38]
Evidence of nuclear geometry-driven anisotropic flow in OO and NeNe collisions at √sNN =5.36 TeV
ALICE Collaboration, “Evidence of nuclear geometry-driven anisotropic flow in OO and NeNe collisions at √sNN =5.36 TeV”, 2025.arXiv:2509.06428. Submitted toPhys. Rev. Lett
2025 arXiv
-
[39]
Measurement of the azimuthal anisotropy of charged particles in√sNN =5.36 TeV 16O+ 16O and 20Ne+ 20Ne 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
2026 arXiv
-
[40]
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”, 2025.arXiv:2510.02580. Accepted byPhys. Rev. Lett
2025
-
[41]
Observation of suppressed charged-particle production in ultrarelativistic oxygen-oxygen collisions
CMS Collaboration, “Observation of suppressed charged-particle production in ultrarelativistic oxygen-oxygen collisions”,Phys. Rev. Lett.136(2026) 162301, doi:10.1103/89sf-9t1x,arXiv:2510.09864
2026 arXiv
-
[42]
System-size dependence of charged-particle suppression in ultrarelativistic nucleus-nucleus collisions
CMS Collaboration, “System-size dependence of charged-particle suppression in ultrarelativistic nucleus-nucleus collisions”, 2026.arXiv:2602.21325. Accepted by Phys. Lett. B
2026 arXiv
-
[43]
Study of nuclear effects on charm production in light ion collisions
LHCb Collaboration, “Study of nuclear effects on charm production in light ion collisions”, 2026.arXiv:2605.27273. Preprint
2026
-
[44]
Centrality dependence of charged-hadron pseudorapidity distributions in oxygen-oxygen collisions at √sNN =5.36 TeV
CMS Collaboration, “Centrality dependence of charged-hadron pseudorapidity distributions in oxygen-oxygen collisions at √sNN =5.36 TeV”, 2026. arXiv:2606.02285. Submitted toPhys. Lett. B
2026 arXiv
-
[45]
Evidence for parton energy loss in oxygen-oxygen collisions at√sNN =5.36 TeV
ALICE Collaboration, “Evidence for parton energy loss in oxygen-oxygen collisions at√sNN =5.36 TeV”, 2026.arXiv:2606.19967. Submitted toPhys. Rev. Lett
2026 arXiv
-
[46]
Measurements of charged-particle pseudorapidity and transverse momentum distributions in OO and NeNe collisions at √sNN =5.36 TeV with the ATLAS detector
ATLAS Collaboration, “Measurements of charged-particle pseudorapidity and transverse momentum distributions in OO and NeNe collisions at √sNN =5.36 TeV with the ATLAS detector”, 2026.arXiv:2606.20257. Submitted toPhys. Rev. C. References 11
2026 arXiv
-
[47]
Observation of centrality-dependent dijet transverse momentum imbalance in OO and NeNe collisions at √sNN =5.36 TeV with the ATLAS detector
ATLAS Collaboration, “Observation of centrality-dependent dijet transverse momentum imbalance in OO and NeNe collisions at √sNN =5.36 TeV with the ATLAS detector”, 2026.arXiv:2606.20463. Submitted toPhys. Rev. Lett
2026 arXiv
-
[48]
Luminosity measurement for lead-lead collisions at√sNN =5.02 TeV in 2015 and 2018 at CMS
CMS Collaboration, “Luminosity measurement for lead-lead collisions at√sNN =5.02 TeV in 2015 and 2018 at CMS”, 2025.arXiv:2503.03946. Submitted to Eur. Phys. J. C
2015 arXiv
-
[50]
Suppression of excitedΥstates relative to the ground state in PbPb collisions at √sNN =5.02 TeV
CMS Collaboration, “Suppression of excitedΥstates relative to the ground state in PbPb collisions at √sNN =5.02 TeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.120(2018) 142301, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.120.142301,arXiv:1706.05984
2018 arXiv
-
[51]
HEPData record for this analysis
CMS Collaboration, “HEPData record for this analysis”, 2026. doi:10.17182/hepdata.180655
2026 doi
-
[52]
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
2008 doi
-
[53]
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
2024 arXiv
-
[54]
Performance of the CMS level-1 trigger in pp collisions at√s=13 TeV
CMS Collaboration, “Performance of the CMS level-1 trigger in pp collisions at√s=13 TeV”,JINST15(2020) P10017,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/15/10/P10017, arXiv:2006.10165
2020 arXiv
-
[55]
The CMS trigger system
CMS Collaboration, “The CMS trigger system”,JINST12(2017) P01020, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/01/P01020,arXiv:1609.02366
2017 arXiv
-
[56]
Performance of electron reconstruction and selection with the CMS detector in pp collisions at √s=8 TeV
CMS Collaboration, “Performance of electron reconstruction and selection with the CMS detector in pp collisions at √s=8 TeV”,JINST10(2015) P06005, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/10/06/P06005,arXiv:1502.02701
2015 arXiv
-
[57]
Performance of the CMS muon detector and muon reconstruction with pp collisions at √s=13 TeV
CMS Collaboration, “Performance of the CMS muon detector and muon reconstruction with pp collisions at √s=13 TeV”,JINST13(2018) P06015, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/13/06/P06015,arXiv:1804.04528
2018 arXiv
-
[58]
Performance of photon reconstruction and identification with the CMS detector in pp collisions at √s=8 TeV
CMS Collaboration, “Performance of photon reconstruction and identification with the CMS detector in pp collisions at √s=8 TeV”,JINST10(2015) P08010, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/10/08/P08010,arXiv:1502.02702
2015 arXiv
-
[59]
Description and performance of track and primary-vertex reconstruction with the CMS tracker
CMS Collaboration, “Description and performance of track and primary-vertex reconstruction with the CMS tracker”,JINST9(2014) P10009, doi:10.1088/1748-0221/9/10/P10009,arXiv:1405.6569
2014 arXiv
-
[60]
Technical proposal for the Phase-II upgrade of the Compact Muon Solenoid
CMS Collaboration, “Technical proposal for the Phase-II upgrade of the Compact Muon Solenoid”, CMS Technical Proposal CERN-LHCC-2015-010, CMS-TDR-15-02, CERN, 2015. 12
2015
-
[61]
Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector
CMS Collaboration, “Particle-flow reconstruction and global event description with the CMS detector”,JINST12(2017) P10003,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/12/10/P10003, arXiv:1706.04965
2017 arXiv
-
[62]
Performance of CMS muon reconstruction from pp to heavy ion collisions
CMS Collaboration, “Performance of CMS muon reconstruction from pp to heavy ion collisions”,JINST19(2024) P09012,doi:10.1088/1748-0221/19/09/P09012, arXiv:2404.17377
2024 arXiv
-
[63]
A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage ofPYTHIA8.3
C. Bierlich et al., “A comprehensive guide to the physics and usage ofPYTHIA8.3”, SciPost Phys. Codeb.2022(2022) 8,doi:10.21468/SciPostPhysCodeb.8, arXiv:2203.11601
2022 arXiv
-
[64]
Extraction and validation of a new set of CMSPYTHIA8 tunes from underlying-event measurements
CMS Collaboration, “Extraction and validation of a new set of CMSPYTHIA8 tunes from underlying-event measurements”,Eur. Phys. J. C80(2020) 4, doi:10.1140/epjc/s10052-019-7499-4,arXiv:1903.12179
2020 arXiv
-
[65]
Measurement of theΥ (1S),Υ (2S), andΥ (3S) polarizations in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV
CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of theΥ (1S),Υ (2S), andΥ (3S) polarizations in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV”,Phys. Rev. Lett.110(2013) 081802, doi:10.1103/PhysRevLett.110.081802,arXiv:1209.2922
2013 arXiv
-
[66]
Υ(nS)polarizations versus particle multiplicity in pp collisions at√s=7 TeV
CMS Collaboration, “Υ(nS)polarizations versus particle multiplicity in pp collisions at√s=7 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B761(2016) 31,doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2016.07.065, arXiv:1603.02913
2016 arXiv
-
[67]
Measurement of theΥpolarizations in pp collisions at √s=7 and 8 TeV
LHCb Collaboration, “Measurement of theΥpolarizations in pp collisions at √s=7 and 8 TeV”,JHEP12(2017) 110,doi:10.1007/JHEP12(2017)110,arXiv:1709.01301
2017 arXiv
-
[68]
First measurement of quarkonium polarization in nuclear collisions at the LHC
ALICE Collaboration, “First measurement of quarkonium polarization in nuclear collisions at the LHC”,Phys. Lett. B815(2021) 136146, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2021.136146,arXiv:2005.11128
2021
-
[69]
Measurement of the azimuthal anisotropy ofΥ (1S) andΥ (2S) mesons in PbPb collisions at √sNN =5.02 TeV
CMS Collaboration, “Measurement of the azimuthal anisotropy ofΥ (1S) andΥ (2S) mesons in PbPb collisions at √sNN =5.02 TeV”,Phys. Lett. B819(2021) 136385, doi:10.1016/j.physletb.2021.136385,arXiv:2006.07707
2021
-
[70]
HIJING: a Monte Carlo model for multiple jet production in pp, pPb and AA collisions
X.-N. Wang and M. Gyulassy, “HIJING: a Monte Carlo model for multiple jet production in pp, pPb and AA collisions”,Phys. Rev. D44(1991) 3501, doi:10.1103/PhysRevD.44.3501
1991 doi
-
[71]
GEANT4—a simulation toolkit
GEANT4 Collaboration, “GEANT4—a simulation toolkit”,Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A506 (2003) 250,doi:10.1016/S0168-9002(03)01368-8
2003 doi
-
[72]
A study of the reactionsψ ′ →γγψ
M. J. Oreglia, “A study of the reactionsψ ′ →γγψ”. PhD thesis, Stanford University,
-
[73]
Charmonium spectroscopy from radiative decays of the J/ψandψ ′
J. E. Gaiser, “Charmonium spectroscopy from radiative decays of the J/ψandψ ′”. PhD thesis, Stanford University, 1982. SLAC Report SLAC-R-255
1982
-
[74]
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
2026
-
[75]
Investigation into the event-activity dependence ofΥ (nS) relative production in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV
CMS Collaboration, “Investigation into the event-activity dependence ofΥ (nS) relative production in pp collisions at √s=7 TeV”,JHEP11(2020) 001, doi:10.1007/JHEP11(2020)001,arXiv:2007.04277. References 13
2020 arXiv
-
[76]
Model study onΥ (nS) modification in small collision systems
J. Kim et al., “Model study onΥ (nS) modification in small collision systems”,Phys. Rev. C107(2023) 054905,doi:10.1103/PhysRevC.107.054905,arXiv:2209.12303. 14 15 A The CMS Collaboration Yerevan Physics Institute, Yerevan, Armenia A. Belyaev , A. Gevorgyan , A. Hayrapetyan, A....
2023 arXiv
-
[1980]
SLAC Report SLAC-R-236
Reviewed August 2, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.
Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.