Systematic Uncertainties

  • Andrea FestantiEmail author
Part of the Springer Theses book series (Springer Theses)


This chapter is devoted to the description of the systematic uncertainties that were studied for each observable in Pb–Pb and p–Pb collisions. The various sources of uncertainty are listed in Table 6.1. In the first part of the chapter, the methods applied to evaluate the “data systematics” (yield extraction, correction for reflections, tracking/cut/PID efficiency and Monte Carlo \(p_\text {T}\) and multiplicity distributions) are presented. The description of the systematic uncertainty related to the B feed-down subtraction and to the scaling of the pp reference cross section needed to compute the nuclear modification factor are given in Sects. 6.7 and 6.8, respectively. In the last four sections the values of the uncertainties for each measured observable are summarized, in particular: Sect. 6.9 is devoted to the \(\text {D}^0\)\(v_2\) measurement, Sect. 6.10 to the azimuthal dependence of the \(R_\mathrm{AA}\), Sect. 6.11 to the minimum-bias measurements in p–Pb collisions (namely the \(p_\text {T}\)-differential cross section and \(R_\mathrm{pPb}\) and the \(p_\text {T}\)- and y-differential cross section), Sect. 6.12 to the multiplicity-dependent analysis carried out in p–Pb collisions (namely the \(Q_\mathrm{pPb}\) and the relative yields as a function of multiplicity).


Systematic Uncertainty Yield Extraction Relative Yield Invariant Mass Distribution Centrality Class 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. 1.
    ALICE Collaboration, B. Abelev et al., Suppression of high-transverse momentum D Mesons in central Pb–Pb Collisions at \(\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=2.76\) TeV. JHEP 1209, 112 (2012) arXiv:1203.2160 [nucl-ex]
  2. 2.
    O. Fochler, J. Uphoff, Z. Xu, C. Greiner, Jet quenching and elliptic flow at RHIC and LHC within a pQCD-based partonic transport model. J. Phys. G 38, 124152 (2011). arXiv:1107.0130 [hep-ph]ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    J. Uphoff, O. Fochler, Z. Xu, C. Greiner, Elliptic flow and energy loss of heavy quarks in ultra-relativistic heavy-ion collisions. Phys. Rev. C 84, 024908 (2011). arXiv:1104.2295 [hep-ph]ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. Uphoff, O. Fochler, Z. Xu, C. Greiner, Open heavy flavor in Pb-Pb collisions at \(\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=2.76\) TeV within a transport model. Phys. Lett. B 717, 430–435 (2012). arXiv:1205.4945 [hep-ph]ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. Cacciari, S. Frixione, N. Houdeau, M.L. Mangano, P. Nason et al., Theoretical predictions for charm and bottom production at the LHC. JHEP 1210, 137 (2012). arXiv:1205.6344 [hep-ph]ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    ALICE Collaboration, B. Abelev et al., Measurement of charm production at central rapidity in proton–proton collisions at \(\sqrt{s}=7\) TeV. JHEP 2012(1) (2012)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    ALICE Collaboration, B. Abelev et al., Centrality determination of Pb–Pb collisions at \(\sqrt{s_{\rm NN}}=2.76\) TeV with ALICE. Phys. Rev. C 88, 044909 (2013)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    ALICE Collaboration, J. Adam et al., Centrality dependence of particle production in p–Pb collisions at \(\sqrt{s_{\rm NN} }\)= 5.02 TeV, arXiv:1412.6828 [nucl-ex]

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Physics, INFN-Sezione di PadovaUniversità degli Studi di PadovaPaduaItaly

Personalised recommendations