Paper detail

Bayesian model comparison for one-dimensional azimuthal correlations in 200GeV AuAu collisions

In the context of data modeling and comparisons between different fit models, Bayesian analysis calls that model best which has the largest evidence, the prior-weighted integral over model parameters of the likelihood function. Evidence calculations automatically take into account both the usual chi-squared measure and an Occam factor which quantifies the price for adding extra parameters. Applying Bayesian analysis to projections onto azimuth of 2D angular correlations from 200 GeV AuAu collisions, we consider typical model choices including Fourier series and a Gaussian plus combinations of individual cosine components. We find that models including a Gaussian component are consistently preferred over pure Fourier-series parametrizations, sometimes strongly so. For 0-5% central collisions the Gaussian-plus-dipole model performs better than Fourier Series models or any other combination of Gaussian-plus-multipoles.

preprint2015arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors1 topic

Next steps

Decide what to do with this paper

Use like or dislike for the fast social read. The more specific scholarly feedback stays available below when needed.

Log in to curate

Reading frame

Keep the important context close to the paper

Keep the important signals around this paper in one place: votes, save state, collection context, reviews and the metadata you need before deciding what to do next.

Institutions

Add specific reaction

Move through the context

Research map

Open full explorer

Move through nearby people, institutions, topics and adjacent work without leaving the paper page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Structured reviews

0 review(s)

ContributeLeave structured feedbackUse the review template when you have a concrete strength, concern or method question.Open review form

No structured reviews yet. High-signal critique starts here.

Work discussion

0 comment(s)

DiscussAdd a high-signal commentKeep quick notes, caveats and replication pointers separate from formal reviews.Open comment form

No discussion yet. The first strong comment sets the tone.