1

Production of Hadrons Correlated to Jets in High Energy Heavy-Ion Collisions

Charles Chiu

Center for Particles and Fields

University of Texas at Austin

Shangdong University, Jinan, Shangdong, June 8, 2009

2

Outline

1. An overview on hadrons production in high energy heavy ion collisions

2. Transverse flow of the Quark-Gluon matter

3. Jet-medium interactions

4. Ridge phenomena, and the correlated emission model (CEM)

5. Summary

3

From Bevalac to RHIC, and to LHCBevalac:U with 2 GeV/N on U-target

AGS-RHIC: Au+Au WNN=200GeV

SPS-LHC: Pb+Pb WNN=5.5TeV

1.Overview on hadron production in heavy ion collisions

4

Collaboration

STARSTARBrazil RussiaUniversidade de Sao Paolo MEPHI – Moscow

LPP/LHE JINR - DubnaChina IHEP-Protvino IHEP - BeijingUSTC - Hefei IMP - LanzhouSINR - ShanghaiTsinghua UniversityIPP - Wuhan U.S. Labs

Argonne National LaboratoryEngland Brookhaven National LaboratoryUniversity of Birmingham Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory

France U.S. Universities IReS Strasbourg UC Berkeley / SSLSUBATECH - Nantes UC Davis

UC Los AngelesGermany Carnegie Mellon UniversityMPI – Munich Creighton UniversityUniversity of Frankfurt Indiana University

Kent State UniversityIndia Michigan State UniversityIOP - Bhubaneswar City College of New YorkVECC - Calcutta Ohio State UniversityPanjab University Penn. State UniversityUniversity of Rajasthan Purdue UniversityJammu University Rice UniversityIIT - Bombay University of Texas - Austin

Texas A&M UniversityPoland University of Washington Warsaw University of Technology Wayne State University

Yale University

419 collaborators 44 institutions 9 countries

5

Energy range on cosmological scale

6Sorenson, Winterworshop 08

7

d/dNch vs Nch

Au + Au sNN = 200 GeV

b

Nch: # of charged pcles in an event

b: Distance between 2 centers

Npart: # of participating

NN pairs

“Centrality”: Area-bins from right to left.

8

Outgoing particle: Kinematic labels

y

8

x

pT

Pseudorapidity = ln( cot /2 )

Transverse mom pT

Azimuthal angle

9

Is Quark-Gluon matter really produced in HIC?

• If it is, particles produced should not be incoherent superposition of those from NN collisions.

• The hadronic matter should be regarded as a macro-system of its own. Expect a collective behavior following up the explosion.

• Observation of transverse flow signals that the macro-system has been formed.– radial flow – elliptic flow

2. Transverse flow of the Quark-Gluon matter

10

pT-distribution: ~exp[-pT/T*]

Light pcle: T*=TT

Massive: T*~mvT

As A increases,

• the line becomes steeper

• collective flow becomes more pronounced

PbPb, A=208

SS, A=32,

pp

Shuryak 04

sNN~25GeV

Evidence on radial flow

T*

11

, K, N Spectra (STAR)

Each Nch-bin is fitted by freeze-out:Tkin & flow speed:

In the central region collective flow speed reaches 0.6.

AA-collision

Central

Intermediate

Peripheral

pp-collision

Blast Wave Model

12

Conserv. of local baryon number, energy and momentum

Relativistic hydro-equations of ideal fluid

, leads to ( with )

(1)

(2)

Here cs is the speed of sound, with

(1) Decrease of nB and e due to local expansion

(2) Acceleration is due to local pressure gradient

Heinz05, A reviewHydrodynamic-model

13

v2 a measure momentum anisotropy

x

y

p

ptan

V2 = [ <px2> -<py

2>] / [ <px2> +<py

2>]=< cos2 >,

dN/d = dN/d(0o)[ 1 + V2 cos2+ …]

Spatial anisotropy momentum anisotropy

y

x x

y

14

Elliptic Flow

Equal energy density lines

Kolb, Sollfrank, Heinz

15

Hydro model: pT dependence. Kolb&Rapp03

Model describs pT spectra of various species & centralities

• Decoupling temperature assumed, 165MeV (blue), 100 MeV (red).

• Early thermal equilibrium: t0~0.6 f/c is used.

16

Comparison between hydro-model and the v2 data

Centrality dependence:

Overall agreement, except near peripheral region where model prediction v2 is larger than data.

PT-curves for pions and protons are confirmed by the data. More accurate kaon data are needed.

STAR PRL87 (2001)182301midrapidity : || < 1.0

Peripheral Central

STARModel

PRL 86 (2001) 402

17

Jet quenching

is highly suppressed in Au+Au vs in d+Au.

Suppression extends to all accessible pT.

Away side jet:

Suppressed in Au+Au

Presence in p+p and in d+Au.x

Trigger

Away-side jet suppressed

ddpdT

ddpNdpR

TNN

AA

TAA

TAA /

/)(

2

2

Nuclear Mod. factor

Large pT suppression

3. Jets-medium interactions

18

Ridge phenomena: 2-particle correlation

STAR data. Putschke, QM06

Central: 3 < pTtrig< 4 GeV, pTassoc > 2 GeV

dN/d vs

R: Plateau, J: Peak

trig-assoc

trig-assoc

18

Differences: trig. and assoc

19

A ridge model without early therm equilib.

• Assume many semi-hard jets (2-3 GeV) are produced near the surface of the initial almond.

• Jets-medium interaction generates a layer of enhanced thermal partons. They are the ridge particles, R.

• The bulk thermal medium background, B is isotropic. • Total thermal partons yield:

v2(pT,b) is determined based on phenomenological properties of B(pT) and R(pT)

Hwa 08CC, Hwa, Yang 08

20

Comparison between the ridge model and the v2 data

Recombination model: ET up to 5 GeV.Pions: Include TT, TS, SSProtons: TTT, TTS, TSS

ET<1, TT only.

V2: Pions V2: Protons

21

Trigger Azimuth dependence

Feng, STAR (QM08)

3 < pTtrig< 4 GeV; 1.5 < pTassoc< 2 GeVs

Trigger

Assoc

x

y

Beam

Feature:

For 20-60% the yield decreases rapidly with s.

22

A scenario on the ridge formation

• A semi-hard collision at P. One parton exits as trigger, the other absorbed by the medium.

• Exit parton traverses through the medium, accompanied by soft radiations.

• Absorption of radiation energy locally energizes the thermal partons

• Enhanced thermal partons carried by the flow. They lead to the formation of ridge particles.

x

x

y

P(x0,y0)

trigger

flow

4. Correlated emission model (CEM) CC, Hwa 09

23

Trigger direction vs flow direction

Mismatched case |s – |~900 : Enhanced thermal partons dispersed over a wide range of -- weak ridge. Local flow along (green)

Trigger along s (red)

x

Matched case |s –|~0: Enhanced thermal partons flow in the same direction, leading to strong ridge.

24

• Ridge yield at with trigger s due to interaction at x0,y0

Ridge yield per trigger (including all pts)

• P(x0, y0, t): Probability parton traverses t and emerges as a trigger.

s

(x0,y0)

tInteraction at one point: (x0, y0)

s

t’

C

t’

25

Comparison with the data

Parameters:

• Thickness of interaction layer is ~ RA/4

• Gaussian-width of scone ~200.

Normallized to fit one point at lowest s for 0-5%.

25

CEM fit to the s data

26

Comparison with data in 20-60% region

Left panel Shift of the peak from =0:

• Matched “In”-region (<0) is larger at ~40%

• Mismatched “out”-region ( is smaller at ~40%

shift

b=0 ~40%

in

out

= -s

27

Model predictions

curves: The left-shift in the peak position as a function of s.

27

Asymmetry vs s

28

R-yield vs b (or Npart) at various s

We predict decrease of yield/trigger as b is decreased at small s

28

29

5.Summary

• Some well known features are:– Experimental evidence of transverse collective flows

– Hydrodynamic model has been success in predicting pT spectrum and v2 data at least up to 1GeV

– There are strong jet-medium interactions, and the medium strongly absorptive.

• More recent discovery of Ridge phenomenon is discussed. – Ridge particles are generated in jet-medium interaction.

They are the enhanced thermal partons.

– CEM assumes there is strong correlation between the trigger direction and the flow direction.

– Phenomenological application and further test of the model are presented.