Paper detail

Disentangling Jet Modification

Jet modification in heavy-ion collisions is an important probe of the nature and structure of the quark-gluon plasma (QGP) produced in these collisions and also encodes information about how the wakes that jets excite in a droplet of QGP form and relax. However, in experiment, one cannot know what a particular jet in a heavy ion collision would have looked like without quenching, making it difficult to interpret measurements in terms of individual jet modification. The goal of this Monte Carlo study is to gain insight into the modification of jet observables using the hybrid strong/weak coupling model of jet quenching as a test bed. In this Monte Carlo study (but not in experiment) it is possible to watch $\textit{the same jet}$ as it evolves in vacuum or in QGP. We use this ability to disentangle the effects of modification of individual jets in heavy ion collisions vs. the effects of differing selection bias on the distribution of two observables: fractional energy loss and groomed $ΔR$. We find that in the hybrid model the distribution of groomed $ΔR$ appears to be unmodified in a sample of jets selected after quenching, as in heavy ion collisions, and confirm that this lack of modification arises because of a selection bias toward jets that lose only a small fraction of their energy. If instead we select jets in a way that avoids this bias, and then follow these selected jets as they are quenched, we show that there is, in fact, a substantial modification of the $ΔR$ of individual jets. We show that this jet modification is principally due to the incorporation of particles coming from the wake that the parton shower excites in the plasma as a component of what an experimentalist reconstructs as a jet. The effects we discuss are substantial in magnitude, suggesting that our qualitative conclusions are more general than the Monte Carlo study in which we obtain them.

preprint2020arXivOpen access
0citations
0reviews
0saves
Nocode
Nodataset
0institutions

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 graph slice

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.