Frdric Fleuret - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 16
About This Presentation
Title:

Frdric Fleuret

Description:

FR D RIC FLEURET. LLR CNRS/IN2P3. cole polytechnique. Palaiseau, France ... Suppression of quarkonia is a prediction of lattice QCD calculations, for instance : ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:23
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 17
Provided by: polyi
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Frdric Fleuret


1
Charmonia production in heavy ion collisions,
from SPS to LHC
  • Frédéric Fleuret
  • LLR CNRS/IN2P3
  • École polytechnique
  • Palaiseau, France

2
Introduction
  • Motivations
  • Suppression of quarkonia is a prediction of
    lattice QCD calculations, for instance
  • Experimental setup
  • SPS/CERN NA38, NA50 and NA60 experiments (?sNN
    17 30 GeV)
  • Fixed target experiments
  • Statistic 100 000s J/y
  • Data sets pA w/ Ap, d, Be, Al, Cu, Ag, W, Pb
    SU, InIn, PbPb
  • Small rapidity coverage (typically y ? 0,1)
  • RHIC/BNL Phenix experiment (?sNN 200 GeV)
  • Collider experiments
  • Statistic 1000s J/y (10000s since 2007)
  • Data sets pp, dAu, CuCu, AuAu)
  • Large rapidity coverage (y ? -0.5,0.5, y ?
    -2.2,-1.2 and y ? 1.2,2.2)

H. Satz, J. Phys. G 32 (2005)
3
Charmonium production at SPS
  • NA38, NA51, NA50,NA60
  • Two major results
  • Observation of Cold Nuclear Matter effects
    Absorption by nuclear matter
  • Suppression observed from pp to peripheral PbPb
  • J/y survival probability
  • Fit to data sabs4.18 ?0.35 mb
  • Observation of Anomalous suppression in PbPb
    (NA50) and InIn (NA60) central collisions when
    compared with Cold Nuclear Matter effects.

J/y normal nuclear absorption curve
L
  • NA50, EPJ C39 (2005) 335
  • NA60, PRL99 (2007) 132302

central
peripheral
mid
J/y
collisions
4
Charmonium production at RHIC
Npart number of participant nucleons
  • PHENIX
  • Two experimental stricking observations
  • Point 1 similar behavior SPS.vs.RHIC at
    mid-rapidity
  • At a given Npart, expect different energy
    densities
  • Dont expect same CNM effects

If no nuclear effet, RAA 1
PHENIX, PRL98 (2007) 232301
central
peripheral
mid
collisions
5
Charmonium production at RHIC
Npart number of participant nucleons
  • PHENIX
  • Two experimental stricking observations
  • Point 1 similar behavior SPS.vs.RHIC at
    mid-rapidity
  • Point 2 larger suppression at forward rapidity
    compared to mid-rapidity (confirmed with recent
    data)

PHENIX, PRL98 (2007) 232301 PHENIX preliminary
central
peripheral
mid
collisions
6
SPS .vs. RHIC at mid-rapidityCold Nuclear Matter
effects
PHENIX, PRC77 (2008) 024912
  • Measured RAA include
  • Hot and Dense Matter effects (HDM)
  • Cold Nuclear Matter effects (CNM)
  • Need to remove CNM effects
  • At SPS use pA data (sabs 4.2 mb)
  • At RHIC use dAu data
  • Shadowing (modification of PDFs) could play a
    role
  • Absorption can be smaller
  • due to large uncertainties in dAu data at RHIC
    cant tell weither CNM effects are the same or
    not.
  • Need more precise CNM effect measurements at RHIC
  • run 8 30 x more data (ongoing analysis)

sabs 4.2 mb
dAu
AuAu
7
SPS .vs. RHIC and RHIC mid.vs.fwdHot and Dense
Matter effects suppression models
  • suppression models which reproduce SPS data
    overestimate the suppression at RHIC

All models for y0
SPS
RHIC
  • Fwd.vs.mid in comovers model
  • Comovers density is larger at mid-rapidity
    ? larger suppression expected at mid-rapidity
  • Fails to reproduce the data

Phys. Rev. C76, 064906 (2007)
8
RHIC mid.vs.fwdHot and Dense Matter effects
recombination
  • recombination models
  • Recombination (regeneration) is a mechanism which
    leads non-correlated c and c quarks to combine
    into a cc bound state (such as J/y) cc ? J/y
    X
  • Compensate direct suppression

J. Phys. G 34 (2007) S749
  • Recombination .vs. Rapidity
  • Adding recombination to comovers
  • More recombination at mid-rapidity

How to test recombination ?
arXiv0712.4331v1
9
Testing recombinationPHENIX J/Y flow measurement
Non photonic electrons
  • Non photonic electrons (charmbeauty) flow at
    RHIC. If J/y are regenerated, they should inherit
    from charm-quark flow.
  • Current measurements are not precise enough to
    discriminate.

The elliptic flow v2 characterizes the azimuthal
anisotropy of particle emission with respect to
the collision reaction plane
Positive v2 ? thermalization of the medium
J/y AuAu v2 for y ? 1.2,2.2 J/y AuAu v2
for y lt 0.35
10
RHIC mid.vs.fwdback to CNM effects
  • Could the difference mid.vs.fwd come from CNM
    effects ?
  • CGC (gluon saturation)
  • Enhancement of 3 gluons fusion in J/Y production
    mechanism
  • Absolute amount of suppression is fitted on
    semi-peripheral data
  • Ratio fwd/mid comes from the model

arXiv0808.2954
  • Shadowing (modification of PDFs) based on new
    gg ?J/yg calculations

AuAu
dAu
extrinsic gg ? J/y g X
dAu
intrinsic gg ? J/y X
AuAu
arXiv0809.4684
arXiv0809.4684
11
Point 2 RHiC mid.vs.fwdback to the data
  • Extrapolate CNM effects from dAu to AuAu with
    data driven method
  • Fit dAu data as a function of centrality (impact
    parameter)
  • Extrapolate to AuAu
  • Within errors, the suppression could be the same
    at forward and mid rapidity
  • Need better statistics in dAu ? run 8 (2008) dAu

Survival 38 1822
Mid rapidity
Forward rapidity
Survival 55 2338
12
Conclusionfor SPS and RHIC
  • Summary of SPS and RHIC
  • Comparable RAA at mid-rapidity between SPS and
    RHIC
  • Larger suppression observed by PHENIX at forward
    rapidity compared to mid rapidity ? several
    explanations not discriminate yet.
  • CNM effects are not well constrained at RHIC.
    Need better measurement ? run 8 dAu data ( 80
    000 J/Y) may need other systems.
  • Next at RHIC
  • RHIC luminosities advance
  • Detector upgrades
  • PHENIX barrel and endcap silicon vertex
    detector
  • STAR DAQ upgrade tracking upgrade (silicon
    pixel sensors silicon strip pad sensors)
  • Impact on physics
  • Better mass resolution, better signal/background
    ratio
  • Y, cc measurements (J/Y 0.6 J/Y 0.3 cc ?
    J/Y 0.1 Y?J/Y) ?

13
Outlookfor LHC
  • ATLAS
  • Large rapidity acceptance y lt 2.5
  • Good mass resolution (s68 MeV/c²)
  • Signal/bkg 1
  • Difficult to reconstruct ms with pTlt2.5 GeV
  • CMS
  • Large rapidity acceptance n lt 2.4
  • Very good mass resolution (s35 MeV/c²)
  • Signal/bkg 0.6
  • Limited acceptance at low pT

J. Phys. G Nucl. Part. Phys. 34 (2007) 2307-2455
A. Lebedev - QM08
One month PbPb (0.5 nb-1)
14
Outlookfor LHC
  • ALICE mid (ee-)
  • J/? ? dielectron (ylt0.9)
  • Resolution s30 MeV/c²
  • Signal/Bkg 1.2
  • Expected rate (one month, 106s) 120k
  • ALICE forward (mm-)
  • J/y ? dimuon (-4ltylt-2.5)
  • Resolution s70 MeV/c²
  • Signal/bkg 0.2
  • Expected rate (one month) 680k

J. Phys. G Nucl. Part. Phys. 32 (2006) 12952040
15
Outlookupsilon
  • In the future, new observable bottonium states
  • Expected rates

STAR 12 weeks AuAu
PHENIX 12 weeks AuAu
LHC 1 month
ALICE 2m
ALICE 2e
CMS 2m
ATLAS 2m
16
Charmonia production in HICconclusion
  • Many results already got from SPS and RHIC
  • Still difficult to get a satisfying overall
    picture
  • Lack of CNM effects understanding at RHIC (so
    far)
  • New results from RHIC and upgrades should help to
    make progress
  • Larger statistic (AuAu 2007, dAu 2008 and
    futur)
  • Better heavy flavor study (thanks to upgrades)
  • Y and cc ?
  • LHC experiments should provide a complementary
    view
  • Much higher energy (from 5.5 TeV in PbPb to 14
    TeV in pp) and high statictics
  • Very good detector performances
  • But
  • Only one month of Heavy Ion Collisions per year
  • Different energy regimes (constant Z/AEnergy)
  • pp _at_ 14 TeV (can do pp _at_ 5.5 TeV, but taken on
    HIC one month program)
  • PbPb _at_ 5.5 TeV
  • pPb or Pbp _at_ 8.8 TeV (ALICE has (only) one muon
    spectrometer)
  • Asymetric beam energy implies shift of rapidity
    window (0.5 unit for pPb compared to PbPb) ?
    issues for CNM effects
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com