Nuclear Effects on Hadron Production in d+Au and p+p Collisions at sqrt(s_NN)=200 GeV

et al; PHENIX Collaboration; S.S. Adler

REVIEW

Nuclear Effects on Hadron Production in d+Au and p+p Collisions at sqrt(s_NN)=200 GeV

PHENIX Collaboration, S.S. Adler, et al

Nuclear Experiment · Submitted 8 Mar 2006 · 37 references

Pith's verdict: Solid PHENIX measurement that pinned down the species-dependent Cronin effect in d+Au and delivered the p+p reference for identified-hadron R_AA; the feed-down centrality issue is worth a close look but doesn't sink the paper.

T0 · AI review

How this review was made: An AI referee (deepseek-v4-flash) read the paper on August 28, 2026 and answered a fixed list of questions about it. T0 is the starting level every paper gets. The levels describe how deeply Pith has checked the paper, never the authors.

T0 AI review An AI read the paper and answered a fixed list of questions.
T1 Audit Automatic checks that the references and files the paper relies on exist and match.
T2 Compute The paper's code or calculations re-run with the same results.
T3 Formal statement The claims written out in a formal math language a computer can read.
T4 Proof Those claims proved, and the proof checked by computer.

How Pith checks papers →

· 3 major objections · 5 minor · Ask about this paper · The compiled record · Read the full review →

Challenge this review Comment (0) Read on arXiv ↗

Cite ▾

arXiv IDnucl-ex/0603010 (version 1)

Pith ID5D2PXYWK, Pith's permanent record of this paper and its review

Citationet al, PHENIX Collaboration, S.S. Adler. "Nuclear Effects on Hadron Production in d+Au and p+p Collisions at sqrt(s_NN)=200 GeV." arXiv:nucl-ex/0603010 (2006). https://pith.science/paper/5D2PXYWK

Cite this reviewBibTeX for Pith's review of this paper

Claim paper

Why Pith says this

Highlight any text to comment on it.

Editor's note

read the letter

Quick take: this is the PHENIX paper that established the identified-hadron Cronin effect in d+Au at 200 GeV and delivered the p+p reference for later R_AA analyses. The measurement is careful and the central claim—proton R_dA > pion R_dA, difference grows with centrality—is supported by the data as presented.

What's new: centrality-dependent identified hadron R_dA in d+Au; first PHENIX R_AA for pions, kaons, protons, antiprotons; and a same-run p+p reference that cancels many systematics. The R_dA is a direct ratio of measured yields scaled by Glauber N_coll, no fitting of the model to the data. Systematic uncertainties are itemized by source, feed-down fraction is quantified (26% on the hyperon input, ~10% on prompt protons), and the species comparisons are done in a sensible way. Credit where due.

Soft spots: The feed-down correction deserves a closer look. The text describes a single f(pT) (Fig. 3) for all centralities, based on STAR Λ spectra in p+p and d+Au plus UA5 relative normalizations. It justifies carrying the p+p relative hyperon composition into d+Au by 'the similarity of the Cronin effect for different baryons'—which is in tension with the paper's own result that the Cronin effect is species-dependent. If hyperon production is itself more enhanced in central than peripheral d+Au, a centrality-independent f would under-subtract feed-down protons in central events, inflating the proton R_dA and steepening the centrality trend. The 26% systematic on the feed-down spectrum is large, but that covers a scale error on f, not necessarily a bin-dependent bias. This is a real gap, though it probably does not overturn the main message: the difference between d+Au and central Au+Au baryon enhancement is too large to be explained by this effect.

The centrality definition relies on the south BBC being proportional to the number of participating Au nucleons with uncorrelated hits. Standard for RHIC-era analyses, and the Glauber uncertainties are propagated into the scale boxes, but if that proportionality fails the centrality bins and hence the trend in ν are shifted. Same caveat applies to all d+Au centrality analyses of this vintage.

Minor: no tabulated data in the arXiv version, and the header date (October 2018) suggests a resubmission artifact. Neither affects the physics.

Overall: the paper is a solid control measurement and an important reference. The feed-down issue is worth a question in review, but not grounds for rejection. I'd send it to peer review and would cite it.

Referee report

Significance

If the results hold, this is an important measurement: it establishes that the Cronin enhancement at RHIC is species-dependent and centrality-dependent in cold nuclear matter, and it provides a p+p reference for separating initial-state from final-state effects in Au+Au. The experimental work is careful in several respects: the p+p and d+Au data were taken in the same run, systematic uncertainties are itemized by source in Table II, the feed-down correction is quantified with a 26% systematic, and the Glauber-based N_coll values are given with uncertainties. The comparisons with the Accardi-Gyulassy calculation for pions and with lower-energy data are informative. The main risk to the central claim lies in the weak-decay feed-down correction, which is applied with a centrality-independent fraction f(pT) even though the paper's own conclusion is that the Cronin effect is centrality- and species-dependent.

Major objections (3)

[Section II.B and Fig. 3] The feed-down fraction f(pT) is presented as a single function with no centrality dependence, and the text states that the UA5 relative hyperon normalizations are used for both p+p and d+Au, justified by 'the similarity of the Cronin effect for different baryons.' This assumption is in tension with the paper's central result, which is that the Cronin enhancement is species-dependent and increases with centrality (Figs. 11-13). If hyperon production is more strongly enhanced in central than in peripheral d+Au, as the paper argues for protons, then f should be larger in central bins. Applying a centrality-independent f would under-subtract feed-down protons in central events, inflating the prompt proton R_dA and artificially steepening the proton-pion centrality trend claimed in the abstract. The quoted 26% systematic on the feed-down spectrum and the ~10% systematic on prompt protons do not appear to include a centrality-correlated bias of this kind. I ask the authors to evaluate f per centrality bin using the STAR Lambda spectra (if available) or an explicit model of the hyperon Cronin enhancement, or to demonstrate that the centrality dependence of f changes the reported R_p/R_pi trend by less than the quoted systematics.
[Section III.D, Fig. 13] The figure that provides the main evidence for the centrality dependence of the proton-to-pion ratio shows only statistical errors, while Section II.C quotes a 12% systematic on the p/pi ratio and a 26% feed-down systematic. Because the claim is a difference between central and peripheral ratios, the systematic uncertainties should be displayed or an explicit argument given for which uncertainties cancel in the ratio of ratios. Without this, the robustness of the 30-50% effect cannot be fully assessed.
[Section II.A, Table I] The centrality classes are defined by assuming that the south BBC signal is proportional to N_part^Au and that the hits are uncorrelated. All R_dA points scale with the resulting N_coll values, so a failure of this assumption would shift the reported centrality trends, including the proton-pion difference. The paper refers to reference [23] for details, but the present text does not state what validation was performed. Please summarize the validation of the BBC-centrality assumption, or provide a cross-check with an alternative centrality estimator, so that the sensitivity of the centrality-dependent claim to this assumption is quantified.

Minor objections (5)

[Table I] The trigger bias correction for the 00-20% bin is listed as 0.95 ±0.3; this is likely a typo for 0.95 ±0.03, since the text states that systematic uncertainties on these corrections are less than 4%. Please correct this.
[Section II.B] The construction of the Sigma0, Xi0, and Xi- spectra from the Lambda spectrum by mT scaling is described, but the text attributes the 26% feed-down systematic primarily to the Lambda spectra and particle composition. Please state how the uncertainty in the mT-scaling assumption is propagated into the feed-down correction.
[Figs. 10 and 11] The captions state that the pion and kaon systematic uncertainties are similar to the proton ones but not shown for clarity. Since Fig. 13 uses these quantities, it would be helpful to include representative systematic bands for all species or to tabulate the pT-dependent systematics.
[Section III.D, Fig. 14] The comparison with lower-energy data relies on the assumption sigma_{d+A}=2 sigma_{p+A} and sigma_{p+d}=2 sigma_{p+p}. The text calls this 'very reasonable,' but the impact of this assumption on the energy dependence shown in Fig. 14 is not quantified. Please add a sentence on the expected uncertainty from this assumption.
[General] The corrected spectra and R_dA values are presented only in figures. A table of the numerical values, at least for the minimum-bias R_dA points, would improve the reproducibility and usability of the measurement for model comparisons.

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

The paper

The paper claims

In d+Au collisions at 200 GeV, the nuclear modification factor for protons and antiprotons exceeds that for pions, and the gap grows with centrality.

The reading

This paper reports identified hadron spectra from deuteron-gold and proton-proton collisions at 200 GeV per nucleon pair, and uses the ratio of the two to isolate how the gold nucleus modifies particle production. The central finding is that the nuclear modification factor—the ratio of d+Au yields to binary-collision-scaled p+p yields—rises above one for high-transverse-momentum hadrons, and does so more strongly for (anti)protons than for pions. The proton-pion gap increases as collisions become more central, meaning the enhancement depends on how many nucleon-nucleon collisions each projectile nucleon suffers. Because this cold-nuclear-matter enhancement is far too small to explain the baryon excess seen in central gold-gold collisions, the paper concludes that the Au+Au baryon enhancement needs a hot, dense-medium explanation rather than initial-state nuclear effects alone.

What carries the argument

The central objects are the nuclear modification factor $R_{dA}(p_T)$, defined as the ratio of the d+Au invariant yield to the binary-collision-scaled p+p invariant yield, and the centrality variable $\nu = N_{\rm coll}/N_{\rm part}^d$, the number of inelastic nucleon-nucleon collisions per participating deuteron nucleon. The p+p spectra measured in the same experiment supply the denominator, the Glauber model supplies $N_{\rm coll}$ for each centrality bin, and the ratio of proton to pion $R_{dA}$ isolates the species dependence. Plotting $R_{dA}$ against $\nu$ turns centrality into a continuous knob that distinguishes soft participant-scaling from hard binary-scaling production and shows a larger slope for protons than pions at $1.5 < p_T < 2.7$ GeV/c.

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the discovery is that the Cronin effect—the enhancement of hadron yields in proton-nucleus collisions relative to scaled nucleon-nucleon collisions—is particle-species dependent and centrality dependent at RHIC energy. In minimum-bias d+Au collisions the nuclear modification factor for protons and antiprotons is about 30% to 50% larger than for pions in the most central bin, with kaons tracking pions. The difference grows with centrality, yet even the most central d+Au collisions produce a proton-to-pion ratio close to that of peripheral Au+Au and far below central Au+Au. The paper therefore establishes that cold nuclear matter cannot by itself account for the abundant baryon production in central Au+Au collisions, and that models invoking only initial-state multiple parton scattering, which predict no species dependence, are insufficient to describe the d+Au data.

Load-bearing premise

The entire centrality trend rests on the assumption that the detector signal used to select centrality faithfully counts how many gold nucleons took part in each collision; if that proportionality fails, the reported dependence of the nuclear modification factor on centrality is shifted.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The observed pion $R_{dA}$ agrees with a calculation combining multiple semi-hard initial-state scattering with geometrical shadowing, leaving little room for gluon saturation in the initial state at mid-rapidity at RHIC.
Because the proton-pion difference grows with centrality, any complete account of the Cronin effect must include a baryon-specific production mechanism beyond initial-state parton scattering.
The proton-to-pion ratio in d+Au is close to that in peripheral Au+Au and far below central Au+Au, so the central Au+Au baryon excess cannot be explained by cold nuclear matter alone.
The centrality dependence of $R_{dA}$ for high-$p_T$ hadrons shows a gradual increase with $\nu$, the number of collisions per participant nucleon, rather than an abrupt transition.
The antiparticle-to-particle ratios are flat in $p_T$ and nearly identical in p+p and d+Au, indicating the observed enhancement is not accompanied by a change in baryon-number transport.

Reading between the lines

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

If the growing proton-pion gap with $\nu$ reflects the length of nuclear matter traversed, then lighter or smaller nuclei at the same energy should show a smaller gap; measuring $R_{pA}$ for a range of $A$ would test this directly.
The similar $p/\pi$ ratio in d+Au and peripheral Au+Au at comparable $N_{\rm coll}$ suggests the baryon enhancement may scale with the number of binary collisions rather than with system size; a dedicated comparison of peripheral Au+Au, Cu+Cu, and d+Au at matched $N_{\rm coll}$ could separate the two.
The flat antiparticle/particle ratios imply the baryon enhancement is not due to additional baryon stopping; an implication the authors do not draw is that any successful recombination or junction mechanism must produce particles and antiparticles symmetrically.

Original abstract

PHENIX has measured the centrality dependence of mid-rapidity pion, kaon and proton transverse momentum distributions in d+Au and p+p collisions at sqrt(s_NN) = 200 GeV. The p+p data provide a reference for nuclear effects in d+Au and previously measured Au+Au collisions. Hadron production is enhanced in d+Au, relative to independent nucleon-nucleon scattering, as was observed in lower energy collisions. The nuclear modification factor for (anti) protons is larger than that for pions. The difference increases with centrality, but is not sufficient to account for the abundance of baryon production observed in central Au+Au collisions at RHIC. The centrality dependence in d+Au shows that the nuclear modification factor increases gradually with the number of collisions suffered by each participant nucleon. We also present comparisons with lower energy data as well as with parton recombination and other theoretical models of nuclear effects on particle production.

The compiled record

The paper's own sentences, arranged, kept beside the review and separate from it. Each label is drawn from a closed vocabulary; the number beside it is the probability the classifier gave that label. Numbers in the tables are the authors', checked by code. No sentence in this record was written by a model.

Compiled by classifier-1.13.0 via TypeSafe API, question bank abstract-p1-20260923, 2026-09-23: 1 request, 5,591 input tokens.

What the abstract itself states, as probabilities: claims first 0.03 · states limitation 0.88 · human participants 0.01 · controlled comparison 0.93 · randomized assignment 0.01 · states quantitative result 0.12 · compares with prior results 0.98 · mentions code or data availability 0.02.

The abstract, sentence by sentence

arXiv listing abstract v1. Results and the main claim are underlined; show every role.

PHENIX has measured the centrality dependence of mid-rapidity pion, kaon and proton transverse momentum distributions in d+Au and p+p collisions at sqrt(s_NN) = 200 GeV. The p+p data provide a reference for nuclear effects in d+Au and previously measured Au+Au collisions. Hadron production is enhanced in d+Au, relative to independent nucleon-nucleon scattering, as was observed in lower energy collisions. The nuclear modification factor for (anti) protons is larger than that for pions. The difference increases with centrality, but is not sufficient to account for the abundance of baryon production observed in central Au+Au collisions at RHIC. The centrality dependence in d+Au shows that the nuclear modification factor increases gradually with the number of collisions suffered by each participant nucleon. We also present comparisons with lower energy data as well as with parton recombination and other theoretical models of nuclear effects on particle production.

background contribution method result interpretation main claim

What the classifier reports for each sentence. The number is the probability it gave the label.
#	sentence	role	the authors' own work	states the main conclusion	strength
s0	PHENIX has measured the centrality dependence of mid-rapidity pion, kaon and proton transverse momentum distributions in d+Au and p+p collisions at sqrt(s_NN) = 200 GeV.	contribution 0.97	0.97	0.05	asserted 1.00
s1	The p+p data provide a reference for nuclear effects in d+Au and previously measured Au+Au collisions.	background 0.31	0.48	0.06	asserted 1.00
s2	Hadron production is enhanced in d+Au, relative to independent nucleon-nucleon scattering, as was observed in lower energy collisions.	result 1.00	0.75	0.42	asserted 1.00
s3	The nuclear modification factor for (anti) protons is larger than that for pions.	result 1.00	0.91	0.15	asserted 1.00
s4	The difference increases with centrality, but is not sufficient to account for the abundance of baryon production observed in central Au+Au collisions at RHIC.	interpretation 0.61	0.84	0.24	asserted 1.00
s5	The centrality dependence in d+Au shows that the nuclear modification factor increases gradually with the number of collisions suffered by each participant nucleon.	result 0.99	0.94	0.22	asserted 1.00
s6	We also present comparisons with lower energy data as well as with parton recombination and other theoretical models of nuclear effects on particle production.	contribution 0.84	0.71	0.04	asserted 0.91

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

What was examined, and what was not

sources read

arXiv listing abstract v1

not examined

full text
figures and tables
references and citing sentences
relations to other papers

levels run

P abstract

not run

S sections
T body sentences
C citations
R cross-paper relations

Every quoted sentence on this record is the authors'. Every label is from Pith's closed vocabulary, with the probability shown beside it. Every number in the measurements table is the authors', checked by code. Record as JSON

Figures

**Figure 1.** FIG. 1: (color online) Time of flight vs. charge/momentum

**Figure 3.** FIG. 3: Fractional contributions of protons, f, (solid line

**Figure 4.** FIG. 4: (color online) Invariant yields at mid-rapidity for

**Figure 5.** FIG. 5: (color online) Invariant yields at mid-rapidity for

**Figure 7.** FIG. 7: (color online) Ratio of mid-rapidity spectra for

**Figure 8.** FIG. 8: (color online) Ratio of mid-rapidity spectra for

**Figure 11.** FIG. 11: (color online) Nuclear modification factor

**Figure 12.** FIG. 12: (color online) Integrated

**Figure 13.** FIG. 13: (color online) Ratio of the proton over the pion

**Figure 16.** FIG. 16: (color online) Nuclear modification factors for pi

**Figure 17.** FIG. 17: (color online) Nuclear modification factors for kao

**Figure 18.** FIG. 18: (color online) Nuclear modification factors for

Showing 12 of the paper's 18 figures. See all figures in the PDF ↗ Figures reproduced from arXiv:nucl-ex/0603010 by the authors.

References

Works cited (37)

[23]

S.S. Adler et al. , [PHENIX Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 012304 (2006)

View on Pith 2006
[1]

J.W. Cronin et al. , Phys. Rev. D 11, 3105 (1975)

View on Pith 1975
[2]

D. Antreasyan et al. , Phys. Rev. D 19, 764 (1979)

View on Pith 1979
[3]

P.B. Straub et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 452 (1992)

View on Pith 1992
[4]

K. Adcox et al. , [PHENIX Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 022301 (2002)

View on Pith 2002
[5]

K. Adcox et al. , [PHENIX Collaboration], Phys. Rev. 13 Lett. 88, 242301 (2002)

View on Pith 2002
[6]

40 fm, a value which agrees well with the measured charge radius of R = 6. 38 fm for gold. Using the above parameters and taking into account the BBC eﬃciency the mean number of binary collisions along with the mean number of participating nucleons from the Au nucleus that correspond to each centrality bin are shown in Table I. For the minimum bias d+Au c...

View on Pith
[7]

S.S. Adler et al. , [PHENIX Collaboration]. Phys. Rev. C69, 034909 (2004)

View on Pith 2004
[8]

S.S. Adler et al. [PHENIX Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 172301 (2003)

View on Pith 2003
[9]

R.C. Hwa and C.B. Yang, Phys. Rev. C67, 034902 (2003) and Phys. Rev. C70, 037901 (2003); R.J. Fries, B. Muller, C. Nonaka and S.A. Bass Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 202303 (2003) and Phys. Rev. C68, 044902 (2003); V. Greco, C.M. Ko and P. Levai, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 202302 (2003) and Phys. Rev. C68, 034904 (2003)

View on Pith 2003
[10]

B. Alper et al. , Nucl. Phys. B100, 237 (1975)

View on Pith 1975
[11]

D. Kharzeev, E. Levin and L. McLerran, Phys. Lett. B561, 93 (2003)

View on Pith 2003
[12]

G. Rossi and G. Veneziano, Nucl. Phys. B123, 507 (1977); D. Kharzeev, Phys. Lett. B378, 238 (1996); S.E. Vance, M. Gyulassy and X.-N. Wang, Phys. Lett. B443, 45 1998

View on Pith 1977
[13]

A. Accardi and M. Gyulassy, Phys. Lett. B586, 244 (2004)

View on Pith 2004
[14]

M. Lev and B. Petersson, Z. Phys. C21, 155 (1983)

View on Pith 1983
[15]

I. Vitev, M. Gyulassy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 252301 (2002)

View on Pith 2002
[16]

G. Papp, P. Levai, G. Fai, Phys. Rev. C61, 021902(R) (1999)

View on Pith 1999
[17]

R.C. Hwa and C.B. Yang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 082302 (2004)

View on Pith 2004
[18]

X.N. Wang, Phys. Rev. C61, 064910 (2000)

View on Pith 2000
[19]

K.A. Drees and Z. Xu, “Proceedings of the PAC2001 Conference” 3120 (2001). http://epaper.kek.jp/p03/PAPERS/TPPB032.PDF

View on Pith 2001
[20]

of the PHENIX detector. Cgeo ef f(pT ) normalizes the cross section in one unit of rapidity and full azimuthal coverage. The CBBC bias factor corrects for the fact that the forward BBC trigger counters measure only a fraction of the inelastic p+p cross section. This subset of events on which the BBC triggers contains only a fraction of the inclusive parti...

View on Pith
[21]

K. Adcox et al. , [PHENIX Collaboration], Nucl. Instrum. Methods A499, 469 (2003). In addition to this overview, detailed descriptions of individual subsystems are pub- lished in the same volume

View on Pith 2003
[22]

R. Brun, R. Hagelberg, N. Hansroul and J. Lassalle, CERN-DD-78-2 (1978)

View on Pith 1978
[24]

R.J. Glauber and G. Matthiae, Nucl. Phys. B21, 135 (1970)

View on Pith 1970
[25]

S.S. Adler et al. [PHENIX Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 082302 (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[26]

L. Hulth` en and M. Sagawara, Handbuch der Physik 39 (1957)

View on Pith 1957
[27]

K. Adcox et al. , [PHENIX Collaboration], Nucl. Instrum. Methods A482, 491 (2002)

View on Pith 2002
[28]

R.E. Ansorge et al. , [UA5 Collaboration], Nucl. Phys. B328, 36 (1989)

View on Pith 1989
[29]

J. Adams and M. Heinz, [STAR Collaboration], nucl-ex/0403020, (2004)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[30]

M. Heinz, [STAR Collaboration], J. Phys. G 31, S141 (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[31]

X. Z. Cai, [STAR Collaboration], J. Phys. G 31, S1015 (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[32]

R. Witt, [STAR Collaboration], nucl-ex/0403021 (2004 )

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004
[33]

B.B. Back et al. , [PHOBOS Collaboration], Phys. Rev. C70, 011901 (2004); Phys. Rev. C71, 021901 (2005)

View on Pith 2004
[34]

I.G. Bearden et al. , [BRAHMS Collaboration], Phys. Lett. B607, 42 (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[35]

S.S. Adler et al. , [PHENIX Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 072303 (2003)

View on Pith 2003
[36]

J. Adams et al. , [STAR Collaboration], Phys. Lett. B616, 8 (2005)

View on Pith 2005
[37]

B.Z. Kopeliovich, J. Nemchik, A. Schafer and A.V. Tarasov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 232303 (2002)

View on Pith 2002

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

Impact-parameter dependent nuclear parton distribution functions: EPS09s and EKS98s and their applications in nuclear hard processes
hep-ph 2012-05 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

A four-term fit in nuclear thickness converts the measured mass-number dependence of averaged nuclear PDFs into an impact-parameter-dependent profile, released as EPS09s and EKS98s and applied to centrality-dependent ...
Production of pions, kaons and protons in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=900$ GeV with ALICE at the LHC
hep-ex 2011-01 accept novelty 6.0 of 10

ALICE reports identified pion, kaon and proton transverse-momentum spectra in 900 GeV proton-proton collisions from 0.1 to 2.5 GeV/c, finding that PYTHIA and PHOJET tunes describe pions but miss kaons and protons.
Improved version of the PHOBOS Glauber Monte Carlo
nucl-ex 2014-08 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

The paper releases an updated, openly distributed Monte Carlo Glauber simulation code with new light and deformed nuclei and a fluctuating-proton option for proton-nucleus collisions, plus a users' guide.
Progress in the Glauber model at collider energies
hep-ph 2020-11 accept novelty 3.0 of 10

A decade of LHC and RHIC data confirms that the Glauber model, with improved nuclear profiles and centrality corrections, remains a valid baseline for comparing proton and nuclear collisions.

How the literature uses it

9 arXiv papers cite this in 12 sentences

Each citing sentence is taken from the citing paper's LaTeX source and typed by Pith's classifier. A label appears at probability 0.8 or more (0.95 for support), a contest at 0.7 or more; the quoted words are the citing authors'. How each label was checked · JSON

Papers citing it · 7 sentences without a confident label

Uses its data or values 1 paper

And for the data for inclusive cross-sections for $π^+$ at energies $√(s_NN)$ = 63 GeV and $√(s_NN)$ = 200 GeV we use references [ref] , [ref] , [ref] respectively.

Understanding the Characteristics of Multiple Production of Light Hadrons in Cu + Cu Interactions at Various RHIC Energies: A Model-based Analysis · Production of Main Varieties of Negatively Charged Secondaries · 1.00

Compares with it 3 papers

Previous analyses of the charged hadron spectra by [ref] and the other RHIC experiments [ref] have demonstrated that this enhancement stands in stark contrast to the observed suppression of high $$ hadrons in the (central) collision system at $= 200$ [ref] .

Nucleon-Gold Collisions at 200 AGeV Using Tagged d+Au Interactions in PHOBOS · Introduction · 0.86
The mean $p̅/p$ ratios are given as a function of $Δy$ in Table [ref] and plotted in Fig. [ref], with the results from other experiments [ref] superimposed.

Measurement of prompt hadron production ratios in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} = $ 0.9 and 7 TeV · Results · 0.95
In the bottom panel of Figure [ref], the measured p/$π$ ratio is compared to results at = 200 GeV from the PHENIX Collaboration [ref] .

Production of pions, kaons and protons in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=900$ GeV with ALICE at the LHC · Results · 0.99

Cites it as background 1 paper

Measurements have been performed of the $p̅/p$ ratio in $pp$ collisions both at the LHC [ref] , and at other facilities [ref] .

Measurement of prompt hadron production ratios in $pp$ collisions at $\sqrt{s} = $ 0.9 and 7 TeV · Introduction · 0.96

Discussion

Disagree with the review, or know something it missed? Leave a comment, highlight any passage above to comment on it, or challenge this review formally.

[1] [23]

S.S. Adler et al. , [PHENIX Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 012304 (2006)

View on Pith 2006

[2] [1]

J.W. Cronin et al. , Phys. Rev. D 11, 3105 (1975)

View on Pith 1975

[3] [2]

D. Antreasyan et al. , Phys. Rev. D 19, 764 (1979)

View on Pith 1979

[4] [3]

P.B. Straub et al. , Phys. Rev. Lett. 68, 452 (1992)

View on Pith 1992

[5] [4]

K. Adcox et al. , [PHENIX Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 022301 (2002)

View on Pith 2002

[6] [5]

K. Adcox et al. , [PHENIX Collaboration], Phys. Rev. 13 Lett. 88, 242301 (2002)

View on Pith 2002

[7] [6]

40 fm, a value which agrees well with the measured charge radius of R = 6. 38 fm for gold. Using the above parameters and taking into account the BBC eﬃciency the mean number of binary collisions along with the mean number of participating nucleons from the Au nucleus that correspond to each centrality bin are shown in Table I. For the minimum bias d+Au c...

View on Pith

[8] [7]

S.S. Adler et al. , [PHENIX Collaboration]. Phys. Rev. C69, 034909 (2004)

View on Pith 2004

[9] [8]

S.S. Adler et al. [PHENIX Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 172301 (2003)

View on Pith 2003

[10] [9]

R.C. Hwa and C.B. Yang, Phys. Rev. C67, 034902 (2003) and Phys. Rev. C70, 037901 (2003); R.J. Fries, B. Muller, C. Nonaka and S.A. Bass Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 202303 (2003) and Phys. Rev. C68, 044902 (2003); V. Greco, C.M. Ko and P. Levai, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 202302 (2003) and Phys. Rev. C68, 034904 (2003)

View on Pith 2003

[11] [10]

B. Alper et al. , Nucl. Phys. B100, 237 (1975)

View on Pith 1975

[12] [11]

D. Kharzeev, E. Levin and L. McLerran, Phys. Lett. B561, 93 (2003)

View on Pith 2003

[13] [12]

G. Rossi and G. Veneziano, Nucl. Phys. B123, 507 (1977); D. Kharzeev, Phys. Lett. B378, 238 (1996); S.E. Vance, M. Gyulassy and X.-N. Wang, Phys. Lett. B443, 45 1998

View on Pith 1977

[14] [13]

A. Accardi and M. Gyulassy, Phys. Lett. B586, 244 (2004)

View on Pith 2004

[15] [14]

M. Lev and B. Petersson, Z. Phys. C21, 155 (1983)

View on Pith 1983

[16] [15]

I. Vitev, M. Gyulassy, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 252301 (2002)

View on Pith 2002

[17] [16]

G. Papp, P. Levai, G. Fai, Phys. Rev. C61, 021902(R) (1999)

View on Pith 1999

[18] [17]

R.C. Hwa and C.B. Yang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 082302 (2004)

View on Pith 2004

[19] [18]

X.N. Wang, Phys. Rev. C61, 064910 (2000)

View on Pith 2000

[20] [19]

K.A. Drees and Z. Xu, “Proceedings of the PAC2001 Conference” 3120 (2001). http://epaper.kek.jp/p03/PAPERS/TPPB032.PDF

View on Pith 2001

[21] [20]

of the PHENIX detector. Cgeo ef f(pT ) normalizes the cross section in one unit of rapidity and full azimuthal coverage. The CBBC bias factor corrects for the fact that the forward BBC trigger counters measure only a fraction of the inelastic p+p cross section. This subset of events on which the BBC triggers contains only a fraction of the inclusive parti...

View on Pith

[22] [21]

K. Adcox et al. , [PHENIX Collaboration], Nucl. Instrum. Methods A499, 469 (2003). In addition to this overview, detailed descriptions of individual subsystems are pub- lished in the same volume

View on Pith 2003

[23] [22]

R. Brun, R. Hagelberg, N. Hansroul and J. Lassalle, CERN-DD-78-2 (1978)

View on Pith 1978

[24] [24]

R.J. Glauber and G. Matthiae, Nucl. Phys. B21, 135 (1970)

View on Pith 1970

[25] [25]

S.S. Adler et al. [PHENIX Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 082302 (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[26] [26]

L. Hulth` en and M. Sagawara, Handbuch der Physik 39 (1957)

View on Pith 1957

[27] [27]

K. Adcox et al. , [PHENIX Collaboration], Nucl. Instrum. Methods A482, 491 (2002)

View on Pith 2002

[28] [28]

R.E. Ansorge et al. , [UA5 Collaboration], Nucl. Phys. B328, 36 (1989)

View on Pith 1989

[29] [29]

J. Adams and M. Heinz, [STAR Collaboration], nucl-ex/0403020, (2004)

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[30] [30]

M. Heinz, [STAR Collaboration], J. Phys. G 31, S141 (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[31] [31]

X. Z. Cai, [STAR Collaboration], J. Phys. G 31, S1015 (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[32] [32]

R. Witt, [STAR Collaboration], nucl-ex/0403021 (2004 )

View on Pith Pith review arXiv 2004

[33] [33]

B.B. Back et al. , [PHOBOS Collaboration], Phys. Rev. C70, 011901 (2004); Phys. Rev. C71, 021901 (2005)

View on Pith 2004

[34] [34]

I.G. Bearden et al. , [BRAHMS Collaboration], Phys. Lett. B607, 42 (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[35] [35]

S.S. Adler et al. , [PHENIX Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 91, 072303 (2003)

View on Pith 2003

[36] [36]

J. Adams et al. , [STAR Collaboration], Phys. Lett. B616, 8 (2005)

View on Pith 2005

[37] [37]

B.Z. Kopeliovich, J. Nemchik, A. Schafer and A.V. Tarasov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 232303 (2002)

View on Pith 2002