Paper detail

Event mixing does not reproduce single particle acceptance convolutions for nonuniform pseudorapidity distributions

We point out that the mixed-event method for two-particle acceptance correction, widely used in particle correlation measurements at RHIC and LHC, is wrong in cases where the single particle pseudorapidity distribution is significantly nonuniform. The correct acceptance should be the convolution of two single-particle efficiency$\times$acceptance functions. The error of the mixed-event method, which guarantees a uniform $Δη$ two-particle combinatorial density, is, however, small in correlation analyses where the two particles are integrated over an extended pseudorapidity $η$ range. With one particle fixed in $η$ and the right acceptance correction, the background-subtracted correlated pair density may reveal not only a short-range but also a long-range $Δη$ dependence. This has important physics implication, and may provide crucial information to disentangle physics mechanisms for the recently observed long-range ridge correlation in asymmetric proton-lead collisions at the LHC.

preprint2014arXivOpen access

Signal facts

What is known right now

Open access3 authors2 topics

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.