Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
The STAR Experiment Texas A&M University A. M. Hamed for the STAR collaboration d2NAA/dydpT TAA . d2/dydpT Single -particle spectra RAA PRL. 96, 202301 (2006) PRL 98 (2007)192301 STAR QM08 RAA of light quarks is pt independent as expected by the radiative energy loss. But Unexpected level of suppression for the heavy quarks. No sign for the color factor effect on energy loss. There is no single commonly accepted calculation of the underlying physics to describe in-medium energy loss for different quark generations as well as for the gluon. A. Hamed Texas A&M University Hot Quark 2008 Estes Park, CO August 18th - 23th. More differentiable observable is needed Fragmentation function in vacuum / medium Fragmentation Function : particles distribution in fractional energy. Factorizations Compare Hard Scattering in vacuum-QCD p+p or peripheral Au+Au versus Hard Scattering in the medium Central Au+Au Gluon radiation is induced by multiple scattering . A. Hamed Texas A&M University Hot Quark 2008 Estes Park, CO August 18th - 23th. A particle distribution in fractional energy is softened in the medium 3 Di-hadron azimuthal correlations conservation of linear momentum” momentum Jet-like azimuthal correlations “conservation E E parton trigger hadron Central Au+Au How much energy is lost in here? PRL. 91, 072304 (2003) Trigger 4 < pT,trig < 6 GeV/c 2 < pT,assoc < pT,trig Background is subtracted In the near-side p+p, d+Au, and Au+Au are similar while in the away-side “back-to-back” Au+Au is strongly suppressed relative to p+p and d+Au. A. Hamed An access to the parton initial energy is Texas A&M University required to quantify the energy lost Hot Quark 2008 Estes Park, CO August 18th - 23th. 4 Jet-energy calibration “Direct ” “Mid-rapidity” zero near-side yield for direct photons Fast Detector “Calorimeter” Leading particle “trigger” Background 0 P Color charge density? How much energy is lost in the medium? Due to fragmentation full jet reconstruction is required to access the initial parton energy OR xP xP Direct photons No access to the escape from the parton initial energy medium without any further interactions FF is softened P in the medium Associated particles get the initial parton energy with a powerful alternative method: “Direct -hadron azimuthal correlations” A. Hamed Texas A&M University Hot Quark 2008 Estes Park, CO August 18th - 23th. How to measure direct -hadron azimuthal correlations? 5 Analysis technique Build correlation function for neutral “triggers” with “associated” charged particles Use transverse shower profile to distinguish 2-photon from single-photon showers Comparison of 0 – triggered yields with previously measured charged-hadrons- triggered yields. Extract the yields associated with direct photon triggers A. Hamed Texas A&M University Hot Quark 2008 Estes Park, CO August 18th - 23th. 6 Build correlations function Correlate photon candidate “triggers” with “associated tracks” pT,trig > 8 GeV/c Charged hadrons One tower out of 4800 towers (0.05 x 0.05) 2 0 No track with p > 3 GeV/c points to the trigger tower BEMC: Barrel Electro-Magnetic Calorimeter TPC: Time Projection Chamber TPC Eγ = Eparton Use triggers to explore fragmentation functions in p+p and Au+Au Associated charged particles “3 <pT,assoc < 8 GeV/c” Full azimuthal coverage A. Hamed Texas A&M University Hot Quark 2008 Estes Park, CO August 18th - 23th. How to distinguish between 0/ ? 7 Shower Shape Analysis The two photons originated from 0 hit the same tower at pT>8GeV/c STAR Shower Maximum Detector is embedded at ~ 5x0 between the lead-scintillator layers “BEMC” i : strip energy ri : distance relative to energy maxima 7 RM Use the shower-shape analysis to separate the two close photons shower from one photon shower. A. Hamed Texas A&M University Hot Quark 2008 Estes Park, CO August 18th - 23th. 8 Trigger photons-charged particles azimuthal correlations STAR Preliminary Near side is suppressed with centrality which might due to the increase of /0 ratio . A. Hamed Texas A&M University Hot Quark 2008 Estes Park, CO August 18th - 23th. 9 Effect of shower-shape cut Centrality Centrality Background is not subtracted Vacuum QCD Medium effect oThe away-side correlation strength is suppressed compared to pp and peripheral Au+Au. oThe -rich sample has lower near-side yield than 0 but not A. Hamed zero. Texas A&M University Hot Quark 2008 Estes Park, CO August 18th - 23th. -sample is not pure direct ! How about the 0 ? 10 Comparison of 0-triggered yields to charged-hadron triggered yields Completely different data set from different RHIC runs, different detectors were involved in the analysis too. Associated yields per trigger This analysis Surface bias PRL 97 162301 (2006). Central Au+Au Near side: Yields are similar for p+p and central Au+Au Away side: Yields show big difference between p+p and central Au+Au 0-charged and charged-charged results are consistent. A. Hamed Texas A&M University Hot Quark 2008 Estes Park, CO August 18th - 23th. 0 sample is pure. 11 Method of extract direct associated yield O(αs2α(1/αs+g)) Extraction of direct away-side yields near near R=Y-rich+h/Y0+h Assume no near-side yield for direct then the away-side yields per trigger obey away away Y+h = (Y-rich+h - RY0+h )/(1-R) 0 This procedure removes correlations due to contamination (asymmetric decay photons+fragmentation photons) with assumption that correlation is similar to A. Hamed 0 – triggered correlation at the same pT. Texas A&M University Hot Quark 2008 Estes Park, CO August 18th - 23th. 12 Fragmentation function of direct triggers and 0 triggers Direct Associated yields per trigger 0 Differences between and 0 triggers 0 -triggers are resulted from higher parton energy than -triggers. 0 -triggers are surface biased. Color factor effect. The away-side yield per trigger of direct triggers shows smaller value compared to 0 triggers which is consistent with partons loose energy “dense medium” and then fragment. A. Hamed Texas A&M University Hot Quark 2008 Estes Park, CO August 18th - 23th. What is the medium color charge density? 13 Medium effect on fragmentation function Icp(zT) = Icp(zT) = 1 D0-10% (zT) D40-80% (zT) IAA(zT) = DAA (zT) Dpp (zT) If there is no medium effect Data points trig 8 < pT < 16 GeV/c assoc pT > 3 GeV/c Strong medium effec trig 7 < pT < 9 GeV/c STAR STARPreliminary Preliminary Icp agrees with theoretical predictions. More precision is needed for the measurements to distinguish between different color charge densities. A. Hamed Texas A&M University Hot Quark 2008 Estes Park, CO August 18th - 23th. Within the current uncertainty in the scaling the Icp of direct and 0 are similar. 14 Summary and Outlook First result of -jet azimuthal correlations and fragmentation function D(zT) in AuAu at RHIC energy is reported. Away-side yield for direct photons is significantly suppressed in heavy ion events. Suppression level agrees with theoretical expectations. All results of 0’s near and away-side associated particle yields shows consistency with that of charged hadron triggers. Large luminosity at RHIC enables these measurements. Expect reduced uncertainties from further analysis and future runs. A. Hamed Texas A&M University Hot Quark 2008 Estes Park, CO August 18th - 23th. 15 Thank you for your attention and many thanks to all STAR collaborators 16 Limitations of the shower shape cut Shower Shape Cuts: Reject most of the 0’s. But do not reject photons from: highly asymmetric 0 decay. 10% of all 0 with pT > 8 GeV/c ’s - similar level of background as asymmetric 0 fragmentation photons A. Hamed Texas A&M University Hot Quark 2008 Estes Park, CO August 18th - 23th. 10% of inclusive at intermediate pT in p+p ~30-40% of direct at PT > 8 GeV/c. 17