Paper detail

Wounded Quarks and Multiplicity at Relativistic Ion Colliders

In this paper, we propose a parameterization which is based on a phenomenological model involving the wounded quarks interactions for explaining the average charged particle multiplicity $\ < n_{ch}\ >$, the central pseudo-rapidity density $\ < (dn/dη)_{η=0}\ >$ and complete rapidity dependence of $dn/dη$ in relativistic heavy-ion collider experiments. The model also interrelates nucleus-nucleus (A-A) collisions with p-A and p-p interactions. Our parameterization rests on simple assumptions regarding mean number of participating quarks and their average number of collisions. The results for $\ < n_{ch}\ >$ and their variations with the mass number of colliding nuclei, center-of-mass energy ($\sqrt{s_{NN}}$) and collision centrality are well supported by the available experimental data. Finally we give the predictions from our model for A-A collisions at the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and Compressed Baryonic Matter (CBM) experiments. Our results indicate the existence of a possible universal production mechanism for p-p, p-A and A-A collisions.

preprint2013arXivOpen 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.