Systematic Study of Azimuthal Anisotropy in Cu$+$Cu and Au$+$Au Collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}} = 62.4$ and 200 GeV

TL;DR

This study investigates azimuthal anisotropy $v_2$ in Cu+Cu and Au+Au collisions at different energies, revealing scaling behaviors and energy-dependent differences, especially in Cu+Cu at lower energy.

Contribution

It provides a comprehensive analysis of $v_2$ scaling with eccentricity, participant number, and quark number, highlighting universal patterns and energy-dependent deviations.

Findings

$v_2$ at 200 and 62.4 GeV are similar in Au+Au collisions.

$v_2$ decreases with energy in Cu+Cu collisions, especially peripherally.

Scaling of $v_2$ with $N_{part}^{1/3}$ and quark number is observed.

Abstract

We have studied the dependence of azimuthal anisotropy $v_2$ for inclusive and identified charged hadrons in Au$+$Au and Cu$+$Cu collisions on collision energy, species, and centrality. The values of $v_2$ as a function of transverse momentum $p_T$ and centrality in Au$+$Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{_{NN}}}$=200 GeV and 62.4 GeV are the same within uncertainties. However, in Cu$+$Cu collisions we observe a decrease in $v_2$ values as the collision energy is reduced from 200 to 62.4 GeV. The decrease is larger in the more peripheral collisions. By examining both Au$+$Au and Cu$+$Cu collisions we find that $v_2$ depends both on eccentricity and the number of participants, $N_{\rm part}$. We observe that $v_2$ divided by eccentricity ($\varepsilon$) monotonically increases with $N_{\rm part}$ and scales as ${N_{\rm part}^{1/3}}$. The Cu$+$Cu data at 62.4 GeV falls below the other scaled $v_{2}$ data. For identified hadrons, $v_2$ divided by the number of constituent quarks $n_q$ is independent of hadron species as a function of transverse kinetic energy $KE_T=m_T-m$ between $0.1<KE_T/n_q<1$ GeV. Combining all of the above scaling and normalizations, we observe a near-universal scaling, with the exception of the Cu$+$Cu data at 62.4 GeV, of $v_2/(n_q\cdot\varepsilon\cdot N^{1/3}_{\rm part})$ vs $KE_T/n_q$ for all measured particles.