Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 3 cited by

Visualizing How the Structure of Large-Radius Jets Shapes Their Wakes

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-09 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗

Pith's one-line read This paper argues that published ATLAS data on large-radius jets reclustered from skinny subjets rule out the possibility that quark-gluon plasma sees an entire parton shower as one coherent colored object, and introduces a soft-hadron…

desk verdict New two-subjet wake-shape observable is the real contribution; the Lres=∞ exclusion is plausible but overstated, needing a κsc scan before 'rule out any picture'. read the letter →

arxiv 2501.18683 v2 pith:4V4R2F2R submitted 2025-01-30 hep-ph nucl-th

Arjun Srinivasan Kudinoor , Daniel Pablos , Krishna Rajagopal This is my paper · ORCID
classification hep-phnucl-th
keywords jetquenchingquark-gluonplasmaresolutionlengthlarge-radiusjetssubstructurewakesshapesheavy-ioncollisions
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper uses Hybrid Model simulations to show that the ATLAS measurement of suppression of large-radius R=1 jets built from R=0.2 subjets is incompatible with an infinite resolution length Lres=∞, meaning the quark-gluon plasma must resolve individual hard structures within a parton shower. With Lres=0 or a finite Lres=2/(πT), the model reproduces the ordering and magnitude of RAA for single- versus multi-subjet jets, with current data mildly favoring the finite value. The paper then constructs a new differential jet shape observable for R=2 jets with two skinny subjets in photon-jet events, built in coordinates aligned with the two subjets, and shows that wake hadrons form a single broad cloud until the subjets are separated by Δy12 ~1.2–1.4 in rapidity, after which two distinct sub-wakes appear. Using only hadrons with 0.7

What carries the argument

The carrier of the argument is the Hybrid Model's resolution length Lres, the length scale below which two partons from the same splitting lose energy as one unresolved color charge. Energy loss follows the holographic strongly coupled formula dE/dx = -(4/π) Ein/xstop * $x^{2}$/$xstop^{2}$ / $\sqrt$(1-(x/xstop)^2), with a single fitted κsc; wake hadrons come from the analytic Cooper–Frye expression Eq. (2.4). The new observable is a jet shape ρ(r,r⊥) defined in coordinates whose origin is the higher-pT subjet and whose r-axis points to the lower-pT subjet, so the region between the two subjets is resolved; restricting to 0.7<pT<1.0 GeV isolates the wake contribution.

What would settle it

Measure RAA for large-radius jets with exactly two skinny subjets as a function of their angular separation with much smaller uncertainties, for example using R=0.1 subjets down to ΔR12 ~0.1–0.2; if the measured suppression of multi-subjet jets matches the flat Lres=∞ prediction, the central claim fails. Alternatively, if a soft-hadron jet shape around two subjets separated by Δy12<1.0 already shows two separated peaks, the predicted single broad wake is wrong.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim the authors are trying to establish is that the quark-gluon plasma resolves hard partonic substructure within jets: an entire parton shower does not lose energy coherently as a single colored object. In the Hybrid Model, reproducing the measured suppression of large-radius jets requires a finite QGP resolution length Lres, either zero or ~2/(πT), while Lres=∞ badly fails to describe the ATLAS data. The same setup reveals that two skinny subjets, even when well separated by 0.8–1.0 radians, excite a single common wake in the medium; only at separations Δy12 ≳ 1.2–1.4 do two separate sub-wakes emerge, and this merging can be visualized with soft hadrons of pT between 0.7 and 1.0 GeV.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the holographic strongly coupled energy-loss formula with a universal fitted κsc describes how each parton loses energy in QGP, and that this rate determines how the number of resolved color charges changes with Lres.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If Lres=∞ is excluded, then any model that treats an entire parton shower as a single coherent energy-loss source cannot describe the measured suppression of large-radius jets with multiple skinny subjets.
  • The QGP resolves hard partonic substructure within jets, so the total energy loss of a jet scales with the number of resolved quenched structures it contains.
  • The new soft-hadron jet shape observable should show a single common wake cloud until Δy12 ~1.2–1.4, then two separated wakes, providing a direct experimental image of jet wakes.
  • Measurements using skinnier R=0.1 subjets to reach angular separations ΔR12 ~0.1–0.2 could distinguish Lres=0 from Lres=2/(πT), where the predictions differ most.
  • A full Bayesian refit including κsc and nuclear PDF uncertainties is needed to determine the optimal value of Lres rather than just excluding Lres=∞.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • Editorial inference: the wake-merging threshold may shift with radial flow, which is known to harden and collimate wake hadrons; a more complete event-by-event wake treatment could move the separation point from ~1.4 to closer to ~1.0.
  • Editorial inference: the same two-subjet shape observable could be measured in inclusive jet events, but negative wakes from away-side jets will distort it; imposing a rapidity gap between the selected jet and recoiling jets should mitigate that distortion.
  • Editorial inference: pushing the angular resolution to ΔR12 ~0.1–0.2 with R=0.1 subjets could directly connect the resolution-length picture to perturbative QCD color-coherence predictions, offering a cross-check between strong-coupling and weak-coupling descriptions.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

2 major / 5 minor

Summary. This paper uses the Hybrid strong/weak coupling model to analyze ATLAS measurements of large-radius jets reconstructed from skinny R=0.2 subjets in Pb+Pb collisions. The authors compute R_AA for such jets for three choices of the QGP resolution length, Lres = 0, 2/(πT), and ∞, and compare with the published ATLAS data as a function of jet pT and of the angular separation ΔR12 between subjets. They find that Lres = 0 and Lres = 2/(πT) reproduce the qualitative ordering and rough magnitude of the data, while Lres = ∞ predicts too little suppression for multi-subjet jets; they conclude that the data rule out any picture in which an entire parton shower loses energy coherently as a single colored object. In the second half of the paper, for γ-jet events they introduce a new two-dimensional differential jet shape observable adapted to R=2 jets with two skinny subjets, and use it to show that the soft hadrons from the wakes of two subjets merge into a single broad wake until the subjet rapidity separation exceeds Δy12 ~ 1.2-1.4, after which two sub-wakes become visible. They argue that restricting the observable to hadrons with 0.7 < pT < 1.0 GeV provides an experimentally accessible proxy for the wake shape.

Significance. If the central Lres = ∞ exclusion were established, the paper would provide a sharp, data-driven statement that the QGP resolves substructure within a parton shower, strengthening the case for using jet substructure as a quantitative probe of the medium. The wake-visualization observables in Section 5 are new and potentially impactful, and the authors are appropriately cautious there, explicitly noting that the analytic wake formula Eq. (2.4) is oversimplified, that radial flow is not included, and that their predictions are qualitative rather than quantitative. The paper is clearly written, does a service by reproducing the ATLAS selection in a public-style model setup, and includes useful appendices on ISR effects and on the distorting role of negative wakes in inclusive jet events. However, the headline claim in the abstract is stronger than what the analysis actually demonstrates, because the Lres = ∞ prediction is evaluated at a single hand-calibrated value of the strong-coupling parameter κsc with no propagated uncertainty or scan over that parameter.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 4 (Figs. 1 and 3); Sec. 3.1] The claim that ATLAS data rule out Lres = ∞ is load-bearing, but the Lres = ∞ prediction is evaluated at a single hand-calibrated value κsc = 0.5, set in Sec. 3.1 by requiring inclusive R = 0.4 jet suppression to match the other Lres choices near pT ~ 100 GeV. No uncertainty band from κsc or from nPDF variations is propagated into the green bands in Figs. 1 and 3, and no refit that includes the ATLAS large-radius-jet observables is performed. Since κsc is a free parameter of the excluded model, the comparison demonstrates only that Lres = ∞ with this calibration fails to describe the data; the abstract's wording that the data rule out 'any picture' in which an entire parton shower loses energy coherently is stronger than the evidence. The paper itself acknowledges in Sec. 4 that quantifying constraints on Lres requires refitting κsc and incorporating nPDF uncertainties; that refit, or at least a scan over κsc, is needed before the exclusion can be regarded as established.
  2. [Sec. 2.1, Eq. (2.2)] The exclusion is also model-dependent because the energy-loss rate used for each parton is the holographic N = 4 SYM formula Eq. (2.2) with a universal fitted κsc. If this rate, or its scaling with color charge and distance, is not a good approximation for QCD partons in QGP, then the difference in RAA between single- and multi-subjet jets cannot by itself be used to infer that the medium resolves subjet structure. The paper tests only the Hybrid Model; the conclusion should therefore be framed as ruling out Lres = ∞ within this model class, unless the authors provide an argument that the qualitative failure of the Lres = ∞ scenario is insensitive to the choice of energy-loss formula.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Introduction, p. 4] The word 'cohrently' in the sentence describing Lres = ∞ should be corrected to 'coherently'.
  2. [Sec. 3.1] The list of resolution lengths is written as '0, 2 π/T, and ∞'; this should be '0, 2/(πT), and ∞' to avoid ambiguity with 2π/T.
  3. [Fig. 3 caption] The left-most bin, which denotes single-subjet jets, is placed arbitrarily at ΔR12 = 0.1; the caption should state explicitly that this is an arbitrary placement and not a measured value.
  4. [References] Refs. [116] and [130] are the same paper by K. Zapp; they should be merged into a single reference with appropriate cross-referencing.
  5. [Sec. 5.1, Fig. 4] The vertical scales in panels (a) and (b) of Fig. 4 differ by roughly two orders of magnitude; a sentence in the caption noting this difference would help the reader appreciate the relative size of the wake contribution.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central RAA comparison and the wake-shape proxy are model predictions tested against external data, not fits renamed as predictions.

full rationale

The paper's central comparison in Sec. 4 takes the Hybrid Model with Lres = 0, 2/(πT), and ∞, with κsc = 0.404 and 0.438 taken from the global fit in Ref. [36], and κsc = 0.5 for Lres = ∞ set in Ref. [37] by matching inclusive R = 0.4 jet suppression around pT ~ 100 GeV. None of these calibrations use the ATLAS large-radius R = 1.0 subjet-reclustered RAA measurements or the ΔR12-differential data that the paper compares against, so the disagreement of the Lres = ∞ curve with those data is a genuine prediction rather than a fit renamed as a prediction. The authors explicitly acknowledge that 'quantifying the constraints on Lres implied by comparisons between Hybrid Model calculations and experimental data requires refitting the value of κsc as well as incorporating the uncertainties in the nPDFs' (Sec. 4), which is a stated limitation but not a sign of circularity. The wake-shape analysis in Sec. 5 is a model-based proposal: the model labels wake hadrons via Eq. (2.4), and the paper then shows that a soft-hadron jet shape with 0.7 < pT < 1.0 GeV tracks that label. The proxy is not definitionally identical to the wake shape because the soft-hadron sample also contains fragmentation hadrons, and the quantitative threshold at which two peaks emerge is a computed result rather than an input. No equation in the derivation chain reduces to its own input by construction. Self-citations to the Hybrid Model development (Refs. [32]-[38]) are to prior work with independent external calibrations, so they do not constitute circularity under the stated rules.

Assumptions & free parameters 4 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claims rest on the Hybrid Model, whose energy-loss rate and wake hadronization are taken from prior literature. The only new numerical inputs are the chosen Lres scenarios and κsc calibrations. The paper introduces no new physical entities; 'negative hadrons' are a bookkeeping device for the depletion part of the wake spectrum, not a new particle or force.

free parameters (4)
  • κsc for Lres=0 = 0.404
    Taken from the global fit in Ref. [36] to inclusive hadron and jet suppression; used in the energy loss rate Eq. (2.2). Not fitted to the ATLAS large-radius data used here.
  • κsc for Lres=2/(πT) = 0.438
    Taken from the same global fit in Ref. [36]; used for the finite-resolution scenario.
  • κsc for Lres=∞ = 0.5
    Chosen by imposing that R=0.4 anti-kT jet suppression matches the other Lres choices at pT~100 GeV, Ref. [37]. This hand calibration affects the Lres=∞ comparison.
  • Tc = 145 MeV
    Pseudocritical temperature below which there is no energy loss; a model input inherited from prior Hybrid Model studies.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption The lifetime of a parton in the shower is τ=2E/Q^2 (Eq. 2.1), giving a spacetime picture of the PYTHIA shower.
    Central to embedding the shower in the hydrodynamic medium and to implementing Lres; from Ref. [31], not derived in this paper.
  • domain assumption An energetic parton loses energy in QGP at the strongly coupled N=4 SYM rate of Eq. (2.2) with a fitted κsc.
    Assumes QCD QGP energy loss is described by the holographic N=4 SYM result with rescaled stopping distance; this is the key input to all RAA calculations.
  • domain assumption Lost energy immediately hydrodynamizes into a wake described by the analytic Cooper-Frye formula Eq. (2.4), with no elastic recoils or Moliere scattering.
    The paper explicitly omits elastic recoils in Sec. 2.1 and notes Eq. (2.4) underestimates semi-hard particles and overestimates very soft particles.
  • domain assumption Two partons separated by less than Lres lose energy coherently; subjets from different initiator partons, such as ISR, always lose energy independently even for Lres=∞.
    This Lres implementation from Ref. [35], plus the ISR independence assumption in Appendix A, is required to interpret the residual Lres=∞ suppression.
  • domain assumption The hydrodynamic background is described by iEBE-VISHNU, and the initial parton showers are generated by PYTHIA 8 with EPS09 nuclear PDFs.
    The model embeds showers in a particular hydro background; variations in the background could affect the RAA predictions.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Visualizing How the Structure of Large-Radius Jets Shapes Their Wakes." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/4V4R2F2R

@misc{pith2026250118683,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Visualizing How the Structure of Large-Radius Jets Shapes Their Wakes},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/4V4R2F2R}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2501.18683}
}
abstract

The ATLAS collaboration has introduced and implemented a strategy for selecting and analyzing large-radius jets composed of skinny $R=0.2$ subjets in heavy ion collisions at the LHC. We show how measurements of these jets teach us about the resolution length $L_{\rm res}$ of quark-gluon plasma (QGP) and can teach us how jet substructure shapes the wakes that jets excite in the QGP droplets through which they pass. We use Hybrid Model calculations to reproduce measurements of $R_{AA}$ for large-radius jets in PbPb collisions, and study their dependence on the angle between the two skinny subjets involved in the final reclustering step of an $R=1$ jet. We show how these observables can constrain the value of $L_{\rm res}$ and demonstrate that the ATLAS data rule out any picture in which an entire parton shower loses energy coherently as if it were a single entity. Determining the degree to which the QGP can resolve partons within a jet is central to the broader program of using jet quenching measurements to probe QGP. We make further use of this setup by analyzing the response of the medium to the passage of large-radius $R=2$ jets containing two skinny subjets in gamma-jet events. We introduce novel jet-shape observables that allow us to visualize the angular shape of the soft hadrons originating from the wakes that wide jets with two skinny subjets excite in a droplet of QGP, as a function of the angular separation between the subjets. We find that even when they are $\sim 0.8- 1$ radian apart, a single broad wake is produced. Only when the two subjets are even farther apart is the presence of two sub-wakes revealed. We show that the way in which jet structure shapes jet wakes can be visualized with similar clarity in experiments by using only those hadrons with low $p_T$. These observables thus offer a new and distinctive way of seeing jet wakes in heavy ion collision data.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Constraining the Resolution Length of Quark-Gluon Plasma with New Jet Substructure Measurements

    hep-ph 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    Jet substructure measurements from ALICE and ATLAS, modeled with the Hybrid Model, disfavor both fully coherent and fully incoherent energy loss, implying a finite QGP resolution length near 1/(pi T).

  2. Imaging the Jet-Induced Medium Response with Energy Correlators

    hep-ph 2025-09 conditional novelty 6.0 of 10

    In the Hybrid Model, two- and three-point energy correlators of jets in PbPb collisions cleanly separate wake and elastic-scattering contributions, with both effects needed to match CMS and ALICE data.

  3. What is the Quark-Gluon Plasma made of?

    nucl-th 2025-06 accept novelty 2.0 of 10

    The quark-gluon plasma is best described as a strongly coupled liquid of massive, very short-lived quark and gluon quasiparticles, with sound (phonon) modes becoming the most well-defined collective excitation at low momenta.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

133 extracted references · 14 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Adcox et al., Formation of dense partonic matter in relativistic nucleus-nucleus collisions at RHIC: Experimental evaluation by the PHENIX collaboration, Nucl

    PHENIX Collaboration, K. Adcox et al., Formation of dense partonic matter in relativistic nucleus-nucleus collisions at RHIC: Experimental evaluation by the PHENIX collaboration, Nucl. Phys. A 757 (2005) 184–283, [ nucl-ex/0410003]

    arXiv 2005

  2. [2]

    Arsene et al., Quark gluon plasma and color glass condensate at RHIC? The Perspective from the BRAHMS experiment , Nucl

    BRAHMS Collaboration, I. Arsene et al., Quark gluon plasma and color glass condensate at RHIC? The Perspective from the BRAHMS experiment , Nucl. Phys. A 757 (2005) 1–27, [nucl-ex/0410020]

    arXiv 2005

  3. [3]

    PHOBOS Collaboration, B. B. Back et al., The PHOBOS perspective on discoveries at RHIC, Nucl. Phys. A 757 (2005) 28–101, [ nucl-ex/0410022]

    arXiv 2005

  4. [4]

    ST ARCollaboration, J. Adams et al., 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 (2005) 102–183, [ nucl-ex/0501009]

    arXiv 2005

  5. [5]

    Gyulassy and L

    M. Gyulassy and L. McLerran, New forms of QCD matter discovered at RHIC , Nucl. Phys. A 750 (2005) 30–63, [ nucl-th/0405013]

    arXiv 2005

  6. [6]

    Muller and J

    B. Muller and J. L. Nagle, Results from the relativistic heavy ion collider , Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 56 (2006) 93–135, [ nucl-th/0602029]

    arXiv 2006

  7. [7]

    Casalderrey-Solana and C

    J. Casalderrey-Solana and C. A. Salgado, Introductory lectures on jet quenching in heavy ion collisions , Acta Phys. Polon. B 38 (2007) 3731–3794, [ arXiv:0712.3443]

    arXiv 2007

  8. [8]

    d’Enterria, Jet quenching , Landolt-Bornstein 23 (2010) 471, [ arXiv:0902.2011]

    D. d’Enterria, Jet quenching , Landolt-Bornstein 23 (2010) 471, [ arXiv:0902.2011]

    arXiv 2010

Show all 133 references
  1. [9]

    U. A. Wiedemann, Jet Quenching in Heavy Ion Collisions , arXiv:0908.2306

    arXiv

  2. [10]

    Majumder and M

    A. Majumder and M. Van Leeuwen, The Theory and Phenomenology of Perturbative QCD Based Jet Quenching , Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 66 (2011) 41–92, [ arXiv:1002.2206]

    2011 arXiv

  3. [11]

    B. V. Jacak and B. Muller, The exploration of hot nuclear matter , Science 337 (2012) 310–314

    2012

  4. [12]

    Muller, J

    B. Muller, J. Schukraft, and B. Wyslouch, First Results from Pb+Pb collisions at the LHC , Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 62 (2012) 361–386, [ arXiv:1202.3233]

    2012 arXiv

  5. [13]

    Heinz and R

    U. Heinz and R. Snellings, Collective flow and viscosity in relativistic heavy-ion collisions , Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 63 (2013) 123–151, [ arXiv:1301.2826]

    2013 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Mehtar-Tani, J

    Y. Mehtar-Tani, J. G. Milhano, and K. Tywoniuk, Jet physics in heavy-ion collisions , Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 28 (2013) 1340013, [ arXiv:1302.2579]

    2013 arXiv

  7. [15]

    Shuryak, Strongly coupled quark-gluon plasma in heavy ion collisions , Rev

    E. Shuryak, Strongly coupled quark-gluon plasma in heavy ion collisions , Rev. Mod. Phys. 89 (2017) 035001, [ arXiv:1412.8393]

    2017 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Akiba et al., The Hot QCD White Paper: Exploring the Phases of QCD at RHIC and the LHC , arXiv:1502.02730

    Y. Akiba et al., The Hot QCD White Paper: Exploring the Phases of QCD at RHIC and the LHC , arXiv:1502.02730

    arXiv

  9. [17]

    Romatschke and U

    P. Romatschke and U. Romatschke, Relativistic Fluid Dynamics In and Out of Equilibrium . Cambridge Monographs on Mathematical Physics. Cambridge University Press, 5, 2019

    2019

  10. [18]

    Connors, C

    M. Connors, C. Nattrass, R. Reed, and S. Salur, Jet measurements in heavy ion physics , Rev. Mod. Phys. 90 (2018) 025005, [ arXiv:1705.01974]

    2018 arXiv

  11. [19]

    Busza, K

    W. Busza, K. Rajagopal, and W. van der Schee, Heavy Ion Collisions: The Big Picture, and the Big Questions , Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 68 (2018) 339–376, [ arXiv:1802.04801]. – 43 –

    2018 arXiv

  12. [20]

    J. L. Nagle and W. A. Zajc, Small System Collectivity in Relativistic Hadronic and Nuclear Collisions, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 68 (2018) 211–235, [ arXiv:1801.03477]

    2018 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Cao and X.-N

    S. Cao and X.-N. Wang, Jet quenching and medium response in high-energy heavy-ion collisions: a review , Rept. Prog. Phys. 84 (2021), no. 2 024301, [ arXiv:2002.04028]

    2021 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Schenke, The smallest fluid on Earth , Rept

    B. Schenke, The smallest fluid on Earth , Rept. Prog. Phys. 84 (2021), no. 8 082301, [arXiv:2102.11189]

    2021 arXiv

  15. [23]

    Cunqueiro and A

    L. Cunqueiro and A. M. Sickles, Studying the QGP with Jets at the LHC and RHIC , Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 124 (2022) 103940, [ arXiv:2110.14490]

    2022 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Apolin´ ario, Y.-J

    L. Apolin´ ario, Y.-J. Lee, and M. Winn, Heavy quarks and jets as probes of the QGP , Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 127 (2022) 103990, [ arXiv:2203.16352]

    2022 arXiv

  17. [25]

    QGP Signatures

    J. W. Harris and B. M¨ uller, “QGP Signatures” Revisited, arXiv:2308.05743

    arXiv

  18. [26]

    J. F. Grosse-Oetringhaus and U. A. Wiedemann, A Decade of Collectivity in Small Systems, arXiv:2407.07484

    arXiv

  19. [27]

    Policastro, D

    G. Policastro, D. T. Son, and A. O. Starinets, The Shear viscosity of strongly coupled N=4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills plasma , Phys. Rev. Lett. 87 (2001) 081601, [ hep-th/0104066]

    2001 arXiv

  20. [28]

    Kovtun, D

    P. Kovtun, D. T. Son, and A. O. Starinets, Viscosity in strongly interacting quantum field theories from black hole physics , Phys. Rev. Lett. 94 (2005) 111601, [ hep-th/0405231]

    2005 arXiv

  21. [29]

    Casalderrey-Solana, H

    J. Casalderrey-Solana, H. Liu, D. Mateos, K. Rajagopal, and U. A. Wiedemann, Gauge/String Duality, Hot QCD and Heavy Ion Collisions . Cambridge University Press, 2014

    2014

  22. [30]

    Aad et al., Measurement of Suppression of Large-Radius Jets and Its Dependence on Substructure in Pb+Pb Collisions at sNN=5.02 TeV with the ATLAS Detector, Phys

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al., Measurement of Suppression of Large-Radius Jets and Its Dependence on Substructure in Pb+Pb Collisions at sNN=5.02 TeV with the ATLAS Detector, Phys. Rev. Lett. 131 (2023), no. 17 172301, [ arXiv:2301.05606]

    2023 arXiv

  23. [31]

    Casalderrey-Solana, J

    J. Casalderrey-Solana, J. G. Milhano, and P. Quiroga-Arias, Out of Medium Fragmentation from Long-Lived Jet Showers , Phys. Lett. B 710 (2012) 175–181, [ arXiv:1111.0310]

    2012 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Casalderrey-Solana, D

    J. Casalderrey-Solana, D. C. Gulhan, J. G. Milhano, D. Pablos, and K. Rajagopal, A Hybrid Strong/Weak Coupling Approach to Jet Quenching , JHEP 10 (2014) 019, [arXiv:1405.3864]. [Erratum: JHEP 09, 175 (2015)]

    2014 arXiv

  25. [33]

    Casalderrey-Solana, D

    J. Casalderrey-Solana, D. C. Gulhan, J. G. Milhano, D. Pablos, and K. Rajagopal, Predictions for Boson-Jet Observables and Fragmentation Function Ratios from a Hybrid Strong/Weak Coupling Model for Jet Quenching , JHEP 03 (2016) 053, [arXiv:1508.00815]

    2016 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Casalderrey-Solana, D

    J. Casalderrey-Solana, D. Gulhan, G. Milhano, D. Pablos, and K. Rajagopal, Angular Structure of Jet Quenching Within a Hybrid Strong/Weak Coupling Model , JHEP 03 (2017) 135, [arXiv:1609.05842]

    2017 arXiv

  27. [35]

    Hulcher, D

    Z. Hulcher, D. Pablos, and K. Rajagopal, Resolution Effects in the Hybrid Strong/Weak Coupling Model, JHEP 03 (2018) 010, [ arXiv:1707.05245]

    2018 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Casalderrey-Solana, Z

    J. Casalderrey-Solana, Z. Hulcher, G. Milhano, D. Pablos, and K. Rajagopal, Simultaneous description of hadron and jet suppression in heavy-ion collisions , Phys. Rev. C 99 (2019), no. 5 051901, [ arXiv:1808.07386]

    2019 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Casalderrey-Solana, G

    J. Casalderrey-Solana, G. Milhano, D. Pablos, and K. Rajagopal, Modification of Jet – 44 – Substructure in Heavy Ion Collisions as a Probe of the Resolution Length of Quark-Gluon Plasma, JHEP 01 (2020) 044, [ arXiv:1907.11248]

    2020 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Hulcher, D

    Z. Hulcher, D. Pablos, and K. Rajagopal, Sensitivity of Jet Observables to the Presence of Quasi-particles in QGP , Acta Phys. Polon. Supp. 16 (2023), no. 1 1–A57, [arXiv:2208.13593]

    2023 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Casalderrey-Solana and E

    J. Casalderrey-Solana and E. Iancu, Interference effects in medium-induced gluon radiation , JHEP 08 (2011) 015, [ arXiv:1105.1760]

    2011 arXiv

  32. [40]

    Mehtar-Tani, C

    Y. Mehtar-Tani, C. A. Salgado, and K. Tywoniuk, Jets in QCD Media: From Color Coherence to Decoherence, Phys. Lett. B 707 (2012) 156–159, [ arXiv:1102.4317]

    2012 arXiv

  33. [41]

    Armesto, H

    N. Armesto, H. Ma, Y. Mehtar-Tani, C. A. Salgado, and K. Tywoniuk, Coherence effects and broadening in medium-induced QCD radiation off a massive q ¯q antenna, JHEP 01 (2012) 109, [ arXiv:1110.4343]

    2012 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Mehtar-Tani, C

    Y. Mehtar-Tani, C. A. Salgado, and K. Tywoniuk, The Radiation pattern of a QCD antenna in a dense medium , JHEP 10 (2012) 197, [ arXiv:1205.5739]

    2012 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Casalderrey-Solana, Y

    J. Casalderrey-Solana, Y. Mehtar-Tani, C. A. Salgado, and K. Tywoniuk, New picture of jet quenching dictated by color coherence , Phys. Lett. B 725 (2013) 357–360, [arXiv:1210.7765]

    2013 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Dom ´ ınguez, J

    F. Dom ´ ınguez, J. G. Milhano, C. A. Salgado, K. Tywoniuk, and V. Vila, Mapping collinear in-medium parton splittings , Eur. Phys. J. C 80 (2020), no. 1 11, [ arXiv:1907.03653]

    2020 arXiv

  37. [45]

    Abreu, X

    S. Abreu, X. Mayo L´ opez, G. Milhano, and A. Soto-Ontoso, A generalized picture of colour decoherence in dense QCD media , arXiv:2410.24135

    arXiv

  38. [46]

    D. Bak, A. Karch, and L. G. Yaffe, Debye screening in strongly coupled N=4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills plasma , JHEP 08 (2007) 049, [ arXiv:0705.0994]

    2007 arXiv

  39. [47]

    D’Eramo, M

    F. D’Eramo, M. Lekaveckas, H. Liu, and K. Rajagopal, Momentum Broadening in Weakly Coupled Quark-Gluon Plasma (with a view to finding the quasiparticles within liquid quark-gluon plasma) , JHEP 05 (2013) 031, [ arXiv:1211.1922]

    2013 arXiv

  40. [48]

    K. C. Zapp, JEWEL 2.0.0: directions for use , Eur. Phys. J. C 74 (2014), no. 2 2762, [arXiv:1311.0048]

    2014 arXiv

  41. [49]

    Y. He, T. Luo, X.-N. Wang, and Y. Zhu, Linear Boltzmann Transport for Jet Propagation in the Quark-Gluon Plasma: Elastic Processes and Medium Recoil , Phys. Rev. C 91 (2015) 054908, [arXiv:1503.03313]. [Erratum: Phys.Rev.C 97, 019902 (2018)]

    2015 arXiv

  42. [50]

    S. Cao, T. Luo, G.-Y. Qin, and X.-N. Wang, Linearized Boltzmann transport model for jet propagation in the quark-gluon plasma: Heavy quark evolution , Phys. Rev. C 94 (2016), no. 1 014909, [ arXiv:1605.06447]

    2016 arXiv

  43. [51]

    Y. He, S. Cao, W. Chen, T. Luo, L.-G. Pang, and X.-N. Wang, Interplaying mechanisms behind single inclusive jet suppression in heavy-ion collisions , Phys. Rev. C 99 (2019), no. 5 054911, [arXiv:1809.02525]

    2019 arXiv

  44. [52]

    D’Eramo, K

    F. D’Eramo, K. Rajagopal, and Y. Yin, Moli` ere scattering in quark-gluon plasma: finding point-like scatterers in a liquid , JHEP 01 (2019) 172, [ arXiv:1808.03250]

    2019 arXiv

  45. [53]

    C. Park, S. Jeon, and C. Gale, Jet modification with medium recoil in quark-gluon plasma , Nucl. Phys. A 982 (2019) 643–646, [ arXiv:1807.06550]. – 45 –

    2019 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Dai, J.-F

    T. Dai, J.-F. Paquet, D. Teaney, and S. A. Bass, Parton energy loss in a hard-soft factorized approach, Phys. Rev. C 105 (2022), no. 3 034905, [ arXiv:2012.03441]

    2022 arXiv

  47. [55]

    Ke and X.-N

    W. Ke and X.-N. Wang, QGP modification to single inclusive jets in a calibrated transport model, JHEP 05 (2021) 041, [ arXiv:2010.13680]

    2021 arXiv

  48. [56]

    Cao et al., Determining the jet transport coefficient ˆq from inclusive hadron suppression measurements using Bayesian parameter estimation , Phys

    JETSCAPE Collaboration, S. Cao et al., Determining the jet transport coefficient ˆq from inclusive hadron suppression measurements using Bayesian parameter estimation , Phys. Rev. C 104 (2021), no. 2 024905, [ arXiv:2102.11337]

    2021 arXiv

  49. [57]

    T. Luo, Y. He, S. Cao, and X.-N. Wang, Linear Boltzmann transport for jet propagation in the quark-gluon plasma: Inelastic processes and jet modification , Phys. Rev. C 109 (2024), no. 3 034919, [ arXiv:2306.13742]

    2024 arXiv

  50. [58]

    Pablos and S

    D. Pablos and S. Sanjurjo, Color Coherence Effects in Dipole-Quark Scattering in the Soft Limit, arXiv:2406.08550

    arXiv

  51. [59]

    Casalderrey-Solana, E

    J. Casalderrey-Solana, E. V. Shuryak, and D. Teaney, Conical flow induced by quenched QCD jets , J. Phys. Conf. Ser. 27 (2005) 22–31, [ hep-ph/0411315]

    2005 arXiv

  52. [60]

    Ruppert and B

    J. Ruppert and B. Muller, Waking the colored plasma , Phys. Lett. B 618 (2005) 123–130, [hep-ph/0503158]

    2005 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Renk and J

    T. Renk and J. Ruppert, Mach cones in an evolving medium , Phys. Rev. C 73 (2006) 011901, [hep-ph/0509036]

    2006 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Casalderrey-Solana, E

    J. Casalderrey-Solana, E. V. Shuryak, and D. Teaney, Hydrodynamic flow from fast particles, hep-ph/0602183

    arXiv

  55. [63]

    B. Betz, J. Noronha, G. Torrieri, M. Gyulassy, I. Mishustin, and D. H. Rischke, Universality of the Diffusion Wake from Stopped and Punch-Through Jets in Heavy-Ion Collisions, Phys. Rev. C 79 (2009) 034902, [ arXiv:0812.4401]

    2009 arXiv

  56. [64]

    R. B. Neufeld, B. Muller, and J. Ruppert, Sonic Mach Cones Induced by Fast Partons in a Perturbative Quark-Gluon Plasma , Phys. Rev. C 78 (2008) 041901, [ arXiv:0802.2254]

    2008 arXiv

  57. [65]

    P. M. Chesler and L. G. Yaffe, The Wake of a quark moving through a strongly-coupled plasma, Phys. Rev. Lett. 99 (2007) 152001, [ arXiv:0706.0368]

    2007 arXiv

  58. [66]

    S. S. Gubser, S. S. Pufu, and A. Yarom, Sonic booms and diffusion wakes generated by a heavy quark in thermal AdS/CFT , Phys. Rev. Lett. 100 (2008) 012301, [ arXiv:0706.4307]

    2008 arXiv

  59. [67]

    S. S. Gubser and A. Yarom, Universality of the diffusion wake in the gauge-string duality , Phys. Rev. D 77 (2008) 066007, [ arXiv:0709.1089]

    2008 arXiv

  60. [68]

    S. S. Gubser, S. S. Pufu, and A. Yarom, Energy disturbances due to a moving quark from gauge-string duality , JHEP 09 (2007) 108, [ arXiv:0706.0213]

    2007 arXiv

  61. [69]

    P. M. Chesler and L. G. Yaffe, The Stress-energy tensor of a quark moving through a strongly-coupled N=4 supersymmetric Yang-Mills plasma: Comparing hydrodynamics and AdS/CFT, Phys. Rev. D 78 (2008) 045013, [ arXiv:0712.0050]

    2008 arXiv

  62. [70]

    H. Li, F. Liu, G.-l. Ma, X.-N. Wang, and Y. Zhu, Mach cone induced by γ-triggered jets in high-energy heavy-ion collisions , Phys. Rev. Lett. 106 (2011) 012301, [ arXiv:1006.2893]

    2011 arXiv

  63. [71]

    Tachibana and T

    Y. Tachibana and T. Hirano, Momentum transport away from a jet in an expanding nuclear medium, Phys. Rev. C 90 (2014), no. 2 021902, [ arXiv:1402.6469]

    2014 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Tachibana and T

    Y. Tachibana and T. Hirano, Interplay between Mach cone and radial expansion and its signal in γ-jet events , Phys. Rev. C 93 (2016), no. 5 054907, [ arXiv:1510.06966]. – 46 –

    2016 arXiv

  65. [73]

    L. Yan, S. Jeon, and C. Gale, Jet-medium interaction and conformal relativistic fluid dynamics, Phys. Rev. C 97 (2018), no. 3 034914, [ arXiv:1707.09519]

    2018 arXiv

  66. [74]

    M. Okai, K. Kawaguchi, Y. Tachibana, and T. Hirano, New approach to initializing hydrodynamic fields and mini-jet propagation in quark-gluon fluids , Phys. Rev. C 95 (2017), no. 5 054914, [ arXiv:1702.07541]

    2017 arXiv

  67. [75]

    W. Chen, S. Cao, T. Luo, L.-G. Pang, and X.-N. Wang, Effects of jet-induced medium excitation in γ-hadron correlation in A+A collisions , Phys. Lett. B 777 (2018) 86–90, [arXiv:1704.03648]

    2018 arXiv

  68. [76]

    Tachibana, N.-B

    Y. Tachibana, N.-B. Chang, and G.-Y. Qin, Full jet in quark-gluon plasma with hydrodynamic medium response, Phys. Rev. C 95 (2017), no. 4 044909, [arXiv:1701.07951]

    2017 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Chang, Y

    N.-B. Chang, Y. Tachibana, and G.-Y. Qin, Nuclear modification of jet shape for inclusive jets and γ-jets at the LHC energies , Phys. Lett. B 801 (2020) 135181, [ arXiv:1906.09562]

    2020 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Casalderrey-Solana, J

    J. Casalderrey-Solana, J. G. Milhano, D. Pablos, K. Rajagopal, and X. Yao, Jet Wake from Linearized Hydrodynamics, JHEP 05 (2021) 230, [ arXiv:2010.01140]

    2021 arXiv

  71. [79]

    W. Chen, S. Cao, T. Luo, L.-G. Pang, and X.-N. Wang, Medium modification of γ-jet fragmentation functions in Pb+Pb collisions at LHC , Phys. Lett. B 810 (2020) 135783, [arXiv:2005.09678]

    2020 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Pablos, M

    D. Pablos, M. Singh, S. Jeon, and C. Gale, Minijet quenching in a concurrent jet+hydro evolution and the nonequilibrium quark-gluon plasma , Phys. Rev. C 106 (2022), no. 3 034901, [arXiv:2202.03414]

    2022 arXiv

  73. [81]

    Z. Yang, W. Chen, Y. He, W. Ke, L. Pang, and X.-N. Wang, Search for the Elusive Jet-Induced Diffusion Wake in Z/γ-Jets with 2D Jet Tomography in High-Energy Heavy-Ion Collisions , Phys. Rev. Lett. 127 (2021), no. 8 082301, [ arXiv:2101.05422]

    2021 arXiv

  74. [82]

    Z. Yang, T. Luo, W. Chen, L.-G. Pang, and X.-N. Wang, 3D Structure of Jet-Induced Diffusion Wake in an Expanding Quark-Gluon Plasma , Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (2023), no. 5 052301, [arXiv:2203.03683]

    2023 arXiv

  75. [83]

    Yang and X.-N

    Z. Yang and X.-N. Wang, Rapidity asymmetry of jet-hadron correlation as a robust signal of diffusion wake induced by di-jets in high-energy heavy-ion collisions , arXiv:2501.03419

    arXiv

  76. [84]

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al., Search for the jet-induced diffusion wake in the quark-gluon plasma via measurements of jet-track correlations in photon-jet events in Pb+Pb collisions at √sNN = 5.02 TeV with the ATLAS detector , CERN-EP-2024-202 (8,

    2024

  77. [85]

    CMS Collaboration, Evidence of the medium response with Z-hadron correlations in PbPb and pp collisions at sqrt(sNN) = 5.02 TeV , CMS-PAS-HIN-23-006 (2024)

    2024

  78. [86]

    Sj¨ ostrand, S

    T. Sj¨ ostrand, S. Ask, J. R. Christiansen, R. Corke, N. Desai, P. Ilten, S. Mrenna, S. Prestel, C. O. Rasmussen, and P. Z. Skands, An introduction to PYTHIA 8.2 , Comput. Phys. Commun. 191 (2015) 159–177, [ arXiv:1410.3012]

    2015 arXiv

  79. [87]

    K. J. Eskola, H. Paukkunen, and C. A. Salgado, EPS09: A New Generation of NLO and LO Nuclear Parton Distribution Functions , JHEP 04 (2009) 065, [ arXiv:0902.4154]

    2009 arXiv

  80. [88]

    C. Shen, Z. Qiu, H. Song, J. Bernhard, S. Bass, and U. Heinz, The iEBE-VISHNU code package for relativistic heavy-ion collisions , Comput. Phys. Commun. 199 (2016) 61–85, [arXiv:1409.8164]. – 47 –

    2016 arXiv

  81. [89]

    P. M. Chesler and K. Rajagopal, Jet quenching in strongly coupled plasma , Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014), no. 2 025033, [ arXiv:1402.6756]

    2014 arXiv

  82. [90]

    P. M. Chesler and K. Rajagopal, On the Evolution of Jet Energy and Opening Angle in Strongly Coupled Plasma , JHEP 05 (2016) 098, [ arXiv:1511.07567]

    2016 arXiv

  83. [91]

    S. S. Gubser, D. R. Gulotta, S. S. Pufu, and F. D. Rocha, Gluon energy loss in the gauge-string duality , JHEP 10 (2008) 052, [ arXiv:0803.1470]

    2008 arXiv

  84. [92]

    Cooper and G

    F. Cooper and G. Frye, Single-particle distribution in the hydrodynamic and statistical thermodynamic models of multiparticle production , Phys. Rev. D 10 (Jul, 1974) 186–189

    1974

  85. [93]

    D. Bak, A. Karch, and L. G. Yaffe, Debye screening in strongly coupled script n = 4 supersymmetric yang-mills plasma , Journal of High Energy Physics 2007 (Aug., 2007) 049–049

    2007

  86. [94]

    Cacciari, G

    M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, FastJet User Manual , Eur. Phys. J. C 72 (2012) 1896, [arXiv:1111.6097]

    2012 arXiv

  87. [95]

    Cacciari, G

    M. Cacciari, G. P. Salam, and G. Soyez, The anti- kt jet clustering algorithm , JHEP 04 (2008) 063, [ arXiv:0802.1189]

    2008 arXiv

  88. [96]

    Catani, Y

    S. Catani, Y. L. Dokshitzer, M. H. Seymour, and B. R. Webber, Longitudinally invariant Kt clustering algorithms for hadron hadron collisions , Nucl. Phys. B 406 (1993) 187–224

    1993

  89. [97]

    S. D. Ellis and D. E. Soper, Successive combination jet algorithm for hadron collisions , Phys. Rev. D 48 (1993) 3160–3166, [ hep-ph/9305266]

    1993 arXiv

  90. [98]

    Pablos, Jet Suppression From a Small to Intermediate to Large Radius , Phys

    D. Pablos, Jet Suppression From a Small to Intermediate to Large Radius , Phys. Rev. Lett. 124 (2020), no. 5 052301, [ arXiv:1907.12301]

    2020 arXiv

  91. [99]

    A. Huss, A. Kurkela, A. Mazeliauskas, R. Paatelainen, W. van der Schee, and U. A. Wiedemann, Discovering Partonic Rescattering in Light Nucleus Collisions , Phys. Rev. Lett. 126 (2021), no. 19 192301, [ arXiv:2007.13754]

    2021 arXiv

  92. [100]

    Caucal, E

    P. Caucal, E. Iancu, and G. Soyez, Jet radiation in a longitudinally expanding medium , JHEP 04 (2021) 209, [ arXiv:2012.01457]

    2021 arXiv

  93. [101]

    S. P. Adhya, C. A. Salgado, M. Spousta, and K. Tywoniuk, Multi-partonic medium induced cascades in expanding media , Eur. Phys. J. C 82 (2022), no. 1 20, [ arXiv:2106.02592]

    2022 arXiv

  94. [102]

    Pablos and A

    D. Pablos and A. Soto-Ontoso, Pushing forward jet substructure measurements in heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. D 107 (2023), no. 9 094003, [ arXiv:2210.07901]

    2023 arXiv

  95. [103]

    J. E. Bernhard, J. S. Moreland, S. A. Bass, J. Liu, and U. Heinz, Applying Bayesian parameter estimation to relativistic heavy-ion collisions: simultaneous characterization of the initial state and quark-gluon plasma medium , Phys. Rev. C 94 (2016), no. 2 024907, [arXiv:1605.03954]

    2016 arXiv

  96. [104]

    G. Nijs, W. van der Schee, U. G¨ ursoy, and R. Snellings, Bayesian analysis of heavy ion collisions with the heavy ion computational framework Trajectum , Phys. Rev. C 103 (2021), no. 5 054909, [ arXiv:2010.15134]

    2021 arXiv

  97. [105]

    M. R. Heffernan, C. Gale, S. Jeon, and J.-F. Paquet, Bayesian quantification of strongly interacting matter with color glass condensate initial conditions , Phys. Rev. C 109 (2024), no. 6 065207, [ arXiv:2302.09478]

    2024 arXiv

  98. [106]

    Ehlers et al., Bayesian Inference analysis of jet quenching using inclusive jet and hadron suppression measurements , arXiv:2408.08247

    JETSCAPE Collaboration, R. Ehlers et al., Bayesian Inference analysis of jet quenching using inclusive jet and hadron suppression measurements , arXiv:2408.08247. – 48 –

  99. [107]

    Falc˜ ao and K

    A. Falc˜ ao and K. Tywoniuk,Constraining Jet Quenching in Heavy-Ion Collisions with Bayesian Inference, arXiv:2411.14552

    arXiv

  100. [108]

    Acharya et al., Measurement of the groomed jet radius and momentum splitting fraction in pp and Pb −Pb collisions at √sN N= 5.02 TeV, Phys

    A Large Ion Collider Experiment, ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., Measurement of the groomed jet radius and momentum splitting fraction in pp and Pb −Pb collisions at √sN N= 5.02 TeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 128 (2022), no. 10 102001, [arXiv:2107.12984]

    2022 arXiv

  101. [109]

    Acharya et al., Measurement of the angle between jet axes in Pb−Pb collisions at √sNN = 5.02 TeV, CERN-EP-2023-046 (3, 2023) [ arXiv:2303.13347]

    ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., Measurement of the angle between jet axes in Pb−Pb collisions at √sNN = 5.02 TeV, CERN-EP-2023-046 (3, 2023) [ arXiv:2303.13347]

    2023 arXiv

  102. [110]

    Aad et al., Measurement of substructure-dependent jet suppression in Pb+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV with the ATLAS detector , Phys

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al., Measurement of substructure-dependent jet suppression in Pb+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV with the ATLAS detector , Phys. Rev. C 107 (2023), no. 5 054909, [ arXiv:2211.11470]

    2023 arXiv

  103. [111]

    CMS Collaboration, A. Hayrapetyan et al., Girth and groomed radius of jets recoiling against isolated photons in lead-lead and proton-proton collisions at √sNN = 5.02 TeV , CMS-HIN-23-001, CERN-EP-2024-073 (5, 2024) [ arXiv:2405.02737]

    2024 arXiv

  104. [112]

    CMS Collaboration, Search for medium-induced jet axis decorrelations with inclusive jets from PbPb collisions at √sNN = 5.02 TeV, CMS-PAS-HIN-24-010 (2024)

    2024

  105. [113]

    CMS Collaboration, First measurement of jet axis decorrelation with photon-tagged jets in pp and PbPb collisions at 5.02 TeV , CMS-PAS-HIN-21-019 (2024)

    2024

  106. [114]

    A. J. Larkoski, S. Marzani, G. Soyez, and J. Thaler, Soft Drop, JHEP 05 (2014) 146, [arXiv:1402.2657]

    2014 arXiv

  107. [115]

    Bertolini, T

    D. Bertolini, T. Chan, and J. Thaler, Jet Observables Without Jet Algorithms , JHEP 04 (2014) 013, [ arXiv:1310.7584]

    2014 arXiv

  108. [116]

    Zapp, The role of initial state radiation in quenched jets , Phys

    K. Zapp, The role of initial state radiation in quenched jets , Phys. Lett. B 835 (2022) 137567, [arXiv:2208.00813]

    2022 arXiv

  109. [117]

    J. G. Milhano and K. C. Zapp, Origins of the di-jet asymmetry in heavy ion collisions , Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016), no. 5 288, [ arXiv:1512.08107]

    2016 arXiv

  110. [118]

    Rajagopal, A

    K. Rajagopal, A. V. Sadofyev, and W. van der Schee, Evolution of the jet opening angle distribution in holographic plasma , Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016), no. 21 211603, [arXiv:1602.04187]

    2016 arXiv

  111. [119]

    Brewer, K

    J. Brewer, K. Rajagopal, A. Sadofyev, and W. Van Der Schee, Evolution of the Mean Jet Shape and Dijet Asymmetry Distribution of an Ensemble of Holographic Jets in Strongly Coupled Plasma, JHEP 02 (2018) 015, [ arXiv:1710.03237]

    2018 arXiv

  112. [120]

    Brewer, A

    J. Brewer, A. Sadofyev, and W. van der Schee, Jet shape modifications in holographic dijet systems, Phys. Lett. B 820 (2021) 136492, [ arXiv:1809.10695]

    2021 arXiv

  113. [121]

    Caucal, E

    P. Caucal, E. Iancu, A. H. Mueller, and G. Soyez, Nuclear modification factors for jet fragmentation, JHEP 10 (2020) 204, [ arXiv:2005.05852]

    2020 arXiv

  114. [122]

    Y.-L. Du, D. Pablos, and K. Tywoniuk, Deep learning jet modifications in heavy-ion collisions, JHEP 21 (2020) 206, [ arXiv:2012.07797]

    2020 arXiv

  115. [123]

    Brewer, Q

    J. Brewer, Q. Brodsky, and K. Rajagopal, Disentangling jet modification in jet simulations and in Z+jet data , JHEP 02 (2022) 175, [ arXiv:2110.13159]

    2022 arXiv

  116. [124]

    Caucal, A

    P. Caucal, A. Soto-Ontoso, and A. Takacs, Dynamically groomed jet radius in heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022), no. 11 114046, [ arXiv:2111.14768]. – 49 –

    2022 arXiv

  117. [125]

    CMS Collaboration, A. M. Sirunyan et al., In-medium modification of dijets in PbPb collisions at √sNN = 5.02 TeV , JHEP 05 (2021) 116, [ arXiv:2101.04720]

    2021 arXiv

  118. [126]

    A TLASCollaboration, Measurement of isolated photon plus multi-jet correlations in Pb+Pb and pp collisions at 5.02 TeV with ATLAS , ATLAS-CONF-2023-008 (2023)

    2023

  119. [127]

    A TLASCollaboration, Expected tracking and related performance with the updated ATLAS Inner Tracker layout at the High-Luminosity LHC , ATL-PHYS-PUB-2021-024 (2021)

    2021

  120. [128]

    CMS Collaboration, The Phase-2 Upgrade of the CMS Endcap Calorimeter , CERN-LHCC-2017-023, CMS-TDR-019 (2017)

    2017

  121. [129]

    ALICE Collaboration, Letter of intent for ALICE 3: A next-generation heavy-ion experiment at the LHC , CERN-LHCC-2022-009, LHCC-I-038 (11, 2022) [arXiv:2211.02491]

    2022 arXiv

  122. [130]

    Zapp, The role of initial state radiation in quenched jets , Physics Letters B 835 (2022) 137567

    K. Zapp, The role of initial state radiation in quenched jets , Physics Letters B 835 (2022) 137567

    2022

  123. [131]

    A TLASCollaboration, G. Aad et al., Measurement of angular and momentum distributions of charged particles within and around jets in Pb+Pb and pp collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV with the ATLAS detector , Phys. Rev. C 100 (2019), no. 6 064901, [arXiv:1908.05264]. [Erratum: Phys.Re...

    2019 arXiv

  124. [132]

    Khachatryan et al., Measurement of transverse momentum relative to dijet systems in PbPb and pp collisions at √sNN = 2.76 TeV, JHEP 01 (2016) 006, [arXiv:1509.09029]

    CMS Collaboration, V. Khachatryan et al., Measurement of transverse momentum relative to dijet systems in PbPb and pp collisions at √sNN = 2.76 TeV, JHEP 01 (2016) 006, [arXiv:1509.09029]

    2016 arXiv

  125. [133]

    Khachatryan et al., Decomposing transverse momentum balance contributions for quenched jets in PbPb collisions at √sN N= 2.76 TeV, JHEP 11 (2016) 055, [arXiv:1609.02466]

    CMS Collaboration, V. Khachatryan et al., Decomposing transverse momentum balance contributions for quenched jets in PbPb collisions at √sN N= 2.76 TeV, JHEP 11 (2016) 055, [arXiv:1609.02466]. – 50 –

    2016 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 9, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.