Pseudorapidity density, transverse momentum spectra, and elliptic flow studies in Xe-Xe collision systems at $\rm{\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 5.44 TeV}$ using the HYDJET++ model

TL;DR

This study uses the HYDJET++ model to analyze pseudorapidity, transverse momentum, and elliptic flow in Xe-Xe collisions at 5.44 TeV, comparing results with experimental data and other models, revealing geometry-dependent effects.

Contribution

First systematic application of HYDJET++ to Xe-Xe collisions at this energy, including geometry effects and comparison with AMPT and experimental data.

Findings

HYDJET++ results agree well with ALICE and CMS data

Pseudorapidity density depends on system size and geometry

HYDJET++ outperforms AMPT in data matching

Abstract

In this paper, we present a systematic study of Xe--Xe collisions at $\sqrt{s_{\mathrm{NN}}} = 5.44$~TeV center-of-mass energy. We employ the Monte Carlo (hydrodynamics plus jets) HYDJET++ model to calculate the pseudorapidity distribution, transverse momentum ($p_{\mathrm{T}}$) spectra, and the elliptic flow ($v_2$) of charged hadrons with different parameters in two geometrical configurations: body-body and tip-tip types of Xe--Xe collisions. The kinematic ranges $0 < p_{\mathrm{T}} < 50~\mathrm{GeV}/c$ and $|\eta| < 0.8$ are considered in our study. Results are obtained for seven classes of centrality. For comparison, we have shown results from the AMPT model with the string-melting version. The results obtained for Xe--Xe collision systems for minimum bias at midrapidity match well with the experimental data from the ALICE and CMS Collaborations. We observe that the pseudorapidity density depends on the size and geometry of the colliding system. The centrality dependence of average transverse momentum ($\langle p_{\mathrm{T}} \rangle$) and average elliptic flow ($\langle v_2 \rangle$) is also observed. The charged hadron properties also show clear dependence on the geometrical configuration of the collisions. Our model results have been compared to results obtained from the AMPT model. The HYDJET++ model matches the experimental data more closely than the AMPT model, which tends to overpredict the data.