Paper detail

Two-component model in quantum statistical framework compared with multiplicity distributions in proton-proton collisions at energies up to $\sqrt {s}$ = 7 TeV

Proton-proton collisions at new high energies ($\sqrt {s} =$ 2.36 and 7 TeV) at LHC resulted into greater mean multiplicities ($<n>$) of charged particles in the mid-rapidity region than estimated ones by different models and event generators. Another significant observation in multiplicity data is the change in slope in the distribution of primary charged hadrons in symmetric pseudorapidity interval $|η|<$2.4. The change is most prominent with data at $\sqrt{s} = 7$ TeV. These new observations merit further studies. We consider a two-component model of particle production to analyze multiplicity distributions of charged hadrons from proton-proton collisions at centre-of-mass energies $\sqrt{s} = $ 0.9, 2.36 and 7 TeV in symmetric pseudorapidity intervals $|η|$ of increasing width around the centre-of-mass pseudorapidity $η_{cm} = 0$. The model, based on quantum statistical (QS) formalism, describes multiplicity distribution by convolution of a Negative Binomial Distribution (NBD), representing a chaotic component, and a Poisson Distribution (PD), representing a coherent component of particle productions. The behaviour of characteristic parameters of the model is followed by the LHC data, while a scaling law, involving information entropy in quantum statistical viewpoint and derived as a function of chaotic multiplicity obtained from the two-component model, is not obeyed by the data, satisfactorily. An attempt to match the measured multiplicity distributions and suggested convolutions with values of characteristic parameters extracted from the data confirms disagreement between the data and the model.

preprint2012arXivOpen 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.