Physics of Particles and Nuclei Letters

, Volume 12, Issue 2, pp 221–229 | Cite as

Self-similarity of hard cumulative processes in fixed target experiment for BES-II at STAR

Physics of Elementary Particles and Atomic Nuclei. Theory


Search for signatures of phase transition in Au + Au collisions is in the heart of the heavy ion program at RHIC. Systematic study of particle production over a wide range of collision energy revealed new phenomena such as the nuclear suppression effect expressed by nuclear modification factor, the constituent quark number scaling for elliptic flow, the “ridge effect” in Δϕ-Δη fluctuations etc. To determine the phase boundaries and location of the critical point of nuclear matter the Beam Energy Scan (BES-I) program at RHIC has been suggested and performed by STAR and PHENIX Collaborations. The obtained results shown that the program (BES-II) should be continued. In this paper a proposal to use hard cumulative processes in BES Phase-II program is outlined. Selection of the cumulative events is assumed to enrich data sample by new type of collisions characterized by higher energy density and more compressed matter. This would allow finding clearer signatures of phase transition, location of a critical point and studying extreme conditions in heavy ion collisions.


cumulative process self-similarity high energy heavy ions critical point phase transition 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    I. Arsene et al. (BRAHMS Collab.), “Quark-gluon plasma and the color glass condensate at RHIC? The perspective from the BRAHMS experiment,” Nucl. Phys. A 757, 1 (2005).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    B. B. Back et al. (PHOBOS Collab.), “The PHOBOS perspective on discoveries at RHIC,” Nucl. Phys. A 757, 28 (2005).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. J. Adams et al. (STAR Collab.), “Experimental and theoretical challenges in the search for the quark gluon plasma: The STAR Collaboration’s critical assessment of the evidence from RHIC collisions,” Nucl. Phys. A 757, 102 (2005).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    K. Adcox et al. (PHENIX Collab.), “Formation of dense partonic matter in relativistic nucleus-nucleus collisions at RHIC: Experimental evaluation by the PHENIX Collaboration,” Nucl. Phys. A 757, 184 (2005).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. Caines, (for the STAR Collab.), “The RHIC beam energy scan-STAR’S perspective,” in Proceedings for the Rencontres de Moriond 2009, QCD session, arXiv: 0906. 0305v1 [nucl-ex], 1 June, 2009.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    B. I. Abelev et al. (STAR Collab.), “Experimental study of the QCD phase diagram and search for the critical point: selected arguments for the Run-10 beam energy scan,” June 4, 2009, Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    M. M. Aggarwal et al. (STAR Collab.), “An experimental exploration of the QCD phase diagram: The search for the critical point and the onset of deconfinement,” arXiv:1007.2613 [nucl-ex] 15 July, 2010.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    STAR Collab. STAR Collaboration Decadal Plan (Brookhaven National Laboratory, Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider, December, 2010),
  9. 9.
    Hot and Dense QCD Matter, “A community white paper on the future of relativistic heavy-ion physics in the US,” Unraveling the Mysteries of the Strongly Interacting Quark-Gluon-Plasma,
  10. 10.
    STAR Collab. Studying the Phase Diagram of QCD Matter at RHIC A STAR white paper summarizing the current understanding and describing future plans, SN0598, June 1, 2014.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    PHENIX Collab., The PHENIX Experiment at RHIC, Decadal Plan 2011–2020 (Brookhaven National Laboratory).Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    H. E. Stanley, Introduction to Phase Transitions and Critical Phenomena (Oxford University Press, London, 1971).Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    H. E. Stanley, “Scaling, universality, and renormalization: Three pillars of modern critical phenomena,” Rev.Mod. Phys. 71, S358 (1999).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    A. Hankey and H. E. Stanley, “Systematic application of generalized homogeneous functions to static scaling, dynamic scaling, and universality,” Phys. Rev. B 6, 3515 (1972).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    S. Lübeck, “Universal scaling behavior of non-equilibrium phase transitions,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. B 18, 3977 (2004).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    M. V. Tokarev and I. Zborovský, “Self-similarity of high pT hadron production in cumulative processes and violation of discrete symmetries at small scales (suggestion for experiment),” Phys. Part. Nucl. Lett. 7, 160 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    M. V. Tokarev et al., “Search for signatures of phase transition and critical point in heavy-ion collisions,” Phys. Part. Nucl. Lett. 8, 533 (2011).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    M. V. Tokarev and I. Zborovský, “Energy scan in heavyion collisions and search for a critical point,” Phys. At. Nucl. 75, 700 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    I. Zborovský and M. V. Tokarev, “Generalized z-scaling in proton-proton collisions at high energies,” Phys. Rev. D 75, 094008 (2007).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    I. Zborovský and M. V. Tokarev, “New properties of z-scaling: flavor independence and saturation at low z,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 24, 1417 (2009).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    M. V. Tokarev and I. Zborovský, “z-scaling as manifestation of symmetry in Nature,” Selected papers of the seminar (2002–2005), “Symmetries and Integrable Systems,” Ed. by A. N. Sysakian (JINR, Dubna, 2006), vol. II, p. 154.Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    M. V. Tokarev, “z-scaling at RHIC,” Phys. Part. Nucl. Lett. 3, 7 (2006).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    M. V. Tokarev, “z-scaling in heavy-ion collisions at the RHIC,” Phys. Part. Nucl. Lett. 4, 676 (2007).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    I. Zborovský and M. V. Tokarev, “Energy scan in heavyion collisions and search for a critical point,” Phys. At. Nucl. 7, 700 (2012).Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    M. V. Tokarev and I. Zborovský, “Self-similarity of pion production in AA collisions at RHIC,” Phys. Part. Nucl. Lett. 7(3), 171 (2010).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    M. V. Tokarev (for the STAR Collab.), “High-p T spectra of charged hadrons in Au + Au collisions at √s NN = 9.2 GeV in STAR,” Phys. At. Nucl. 74(5), 799 (2011).CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    M. V. Tokarev and I. Zborovský, “Beam energy scan at RHIC and z-scaling,” Nucl. Phys. Proc. Suppl. 245, 231 (2013).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    M. V. Tokarev and I. Zborovský, “Energy loss in heavy ion collisions,” in Proceedings 40th International Symposium on Multiparticle Dynamics (ISMD 2010), 21–25 September, 2010, Antwerp. Belgium, p. 301.Google Scholar
  29. 29.
    M. V. Tokarev and I. Zborovský, “Self-similarity of hadron production in heavy ion collisions at RHIC,” Nonlin. Phenom. Complex Syst. 12, 459 (2009).Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    A. M. Baldin, “The physics of relativistic nuclei,” Sov. J. Part. Nucl. 8, 175 (1977).ADSGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    V. S. Stavinsky, “Limiting fragmentation of nuclei—cumulative effect,” Sov. J. Part. Nucl. 10, 949 (1979).Google Scholar
  32. 32.
    G. A. Leksin, “Nuclear scaling. Elementary particles,” in Proceedings of the 3rd Physics School ITEF (Moscow, 1975), no. 2, p. 5; G. A. Leksin, Nuclear Scaling (Moscow,1975), pp. 90.Google Scholar
  33. 33.
    N. A. Nikiforov et al., “Backward production of pions and kaons in the interaction of 400 GeV protons with nuclei,” Phys. Rev. C 22, 700 (1980).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    O. P. Gavrishchuk et al., “Charged pion backward production in 15–65 GeV proton-nucleus collisions,” Nucl. Phys. A 523, 589 (1991).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    I. M. Belyaev et al., “Production of cumulative pions and kaons in proton-nucleus interactions at energies from 15 to 65 GeV,” Phys. At. Nucl. 56, 1378 (1993).Google Scholar
  36. 36.
    G. A. Leksin, “Methods for investigating nuclear matter under the conditions characteristic of its transition to quark-gluon plasma,” Phys. At. Nucl. 65(11), 1985 (2002).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    N. N. Antonov et al., “Measurement of positive charged particle yields in proton-nucleus interactions at √s NN ≈ 10 GeV and the angle of 35 degree” (“Physics of Fundamental Interactions”, Russian Academy of Science, ITEP, Moscow, Russia, 21–25 November, 2011), Google Scholar
  38. 38.
    V. V. Ammosov, N. N. Antonov, A. A. Baldin, et al., “First measurements of cumulative particle production in proton-nucleus interactions at energy 50∼GeV in the region pT > 1 GeV/c,” Seminar LHEP, JINR, June 6, 2012, Dubna,
  39. 39.
    V. V. Ammosov, N. N. Antonov, A. A. Baldin, et al., “A measurement of the yield of the positive particles escaping at 35° angle from proton interactions with nuclear targets at energy of 50 GeV,” Yad. Fiz. 76, 1275 (2013).Google Scholar
  40. 40.
    M. V. Tokarev, O. V. Rogachevsky, and T. G. Dedovich, “Scaling features of π0-meson production in high-energy pp collisions,” J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 26, 1671 (2000).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    M. V. Tokarev, “Neutral-meson production in pp collisions at RHIC and QCD test of z-scaling,” Phys. Atom. Nucl. 72, 541 (2009).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    M. V. Tokarev and I. Zborovský, “On self-similarity of top production at Tevatron,” J. Mod. Phys. 3, 815 (2012).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    M. V. Tokarev, I. Zborovský, and T. G. Dedovich, “Self-similarity of jet production in pp and pbarp collisions at RHIC, Tevatron and LHC,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 27, 1250115 (2012).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    M. V. Tokarev et al., “A-dependence of z-scaling,” Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 16(7), 1281 (2001).CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Pleiades Publishing, Ltd. 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Joint Institute for Nuclear ResearchDubnaRussia
  2. 2.Nuclear Physics InstituteAcademy of Sciences of the Czech RepublicŘežCzech Republic

Personalised recommendations