Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 6 minor 4 cited by

A "breathing'' octupole $^{208}$Pb nucleus: resolving the elliptical-to-triangular azimuthal anisotropy puzzle in ultracentral relativistic heavy ion collisions

T0 review · 2 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that a dynamically fluctuating octupole deformation of the $^{208}$Pb nucleus—a breathing pear shape—resolves the ultracentral $v_2$-to-$v_3$ puzzle and matches the $v_3\{4\}$ data.

desk verdict A plausible fluctuating-octupole mechanism for the ultracentral v2/v3 puzzle, with the headline sigma_beta3 extraction resting on an interpolation the paper itself undermines. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.19644 v2 pith:XLTUR323 submitted 2025-04-28 nucl-th nucl-ex

Hao-jie Xu , Duoduo Xu , Shujun Zhao , Wenbin Zhao , Huichao Song , Fuqiang Wang This is my paper · ORCID
classification nucl-thnucl-ex
keywords ultracentralheavyioncollisionsoctupoledeformationlead-208anisotropicflowcumulantsshapefluctuationsnuclearstructurefromcollidersquark-gluonplasma
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

This paper claims that the longstanding ultracentral $v_2$-to-$v_3$ puzzle in lead-lead collisions at the LHC is resolved if the $^{208}$Pb nucleus has a dynamically fluctuating octupole deformation—a breathing pear shape—rather than a fixed spherical or rigid pear shape. In hydrodynamic simulations with a Gaussian spread of the octupole deformation parameter, the measured $v_2/v_3$ ratio and the four-particle cumulant ratio $v_3\{4\}/v_3\{2\}$ can be described simultaneously, which a static octupole deformation cannot. The preferred values are a mean octupole deformation $\langle \beta_3 \rangle \sim 0.14$ and a fluctuation width $\sigma_{\beta_3} \sim 0.06$. If correct, this would be the first evidence that relativistic heavy-ion collisions can image transient nuclear shapes on a yoctosecond ($10^{-24}$ s) time scale, information that low-energy nuclear reactions cannot provide.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing mechanism is a Gaussian probability distribution for the octupole deformation, $P(\beta_3) \propto \exp[-(\beta_3-\langle\beta_3\rangle)^2/(2\sigma_{\beta_3}^2)]$, applied to each colliding $^{208}$Pb nucleus, together with the contrast between two- and four-particle cumulants. Two-particle cumulants see only the variance $\langle \beta_3^2\rangle$, while four-particle cumulants see the competition between the mean and the fluctuation, approximately $\langle\beta_3\rangle^2 - \sigma_{\beta_3}^2$. That contrast is what lets the model lift the degeneracy between a rigid pear shape and a breathing pear shape and match the measured $v_3\{4\}/v_3\{2\}$ ratio.

What would settle it

Run full iEBE-VISHNU simulations for additional $(\langle\beta_3\rangle,\sigma_{\beta_3})$ combinations on the fixed-RMS curve $\sqrt{\langle\beta_3\rangle^2+\sigma_{\beta_3}^2}=0.15$ and compare their $v_3\{4\}/v_3\{2\}$ directly with the published four-particle cumulant data. If the data point does not lie on the curve through the two endpoints, or if the curve is not monotone, the extraction of $\langle\beta_3\rangle\approx0.14$ and $\sigma_{\beta_3}\approx0.06$ fails. A simpler check is to measure $v_3\{4\}$ with higher precision in the top 1% centrality: a significantly less negative measurement than the predicted value would falsify the breathing scenario.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central discovery is that the puzzle is not a failure of hydrodynamics but a nuclear-structure effect: the colliding $^{208}$Pb nucleus must be allowed to breathe between octupole-deformed shapes, not just sit in one static configuration. In the Woods-Saxon parameterization, the two-particle flow harmonic $v_3\{2\}$ depends on the mean-square octupole parameter $\langle \beta_3^2\rangle = \langle\beta_3\rangle^2 + \sigma_{\beta_3}^2$, so either a static deformation $\beta_3=0.15$ or a pure fluctuation $\sigma_{\beta_3}=0.15$ raises $v_3$ and cures the $v_2/v_3$ ratio. The four-particle cumulant $v_3\{4\}$ responds to $\langle\beta_3\rangle^2 - \sigma_{\beta_3}^2$, which breaks that degeneracy. Comparing the iEBE-VISHNU hybrid model with TRENTo initial conditions against published ultracentral flow data, the paper finds that the data point toward the breathing side, with $\langle\beta_3\rangle \approx 0.14$ and $\sigma_{\beta_3} \approx 0.06$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that smoothly interpolating between the two full hydrodynamic endpoints correctly predicts the final-state $v_3\{4\}/v_3\{2\}$ for intermediate combinations of mean and fluctuating octupole deformation, even though the paper itself notes that the simple initial-to-final mapping breaks down when shape fluctuations are added.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A static, non-fluctuating octupole deformation of $^{208}$Pb is ruled out as a full explanation of the ultracentral data; shape fluctuations are required.
  • The two-particle ratio $v_2\{2\}/v_3\{2\}$ alone cannot tell whether a nucleus is statically deformed or fluctuating; four-particle cumulants are needed to lift that degeneracy.
  • Ultracentral Pb+Pb collisions can act as a yoctosecond-scale snapshot of the nuclear wavefunction, probing transient shapes that low-energy reactions average over.
  • The extracted breathing parameters are consistent with configuration-mixing nuclear-structure calculations, making the heavy-ion result a cross-check of low-energy nuclear theory.

Reading between the lines

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

  • This suggests that the same two-cumulant procedure could be used to extract vibrational softness in other near-spherical closed-shell nuclei at the LHC, where static deformation alone cannot explain the flow ratios.
  • A full Bayesian scan that varies transport coefficients jointly with $\langle\beta_3\rangle$ and $\sigma_{\beta_3}$ could convert the qualitative image into quantitative uncertainties; the paper explicitly leaves that for future work.
  • One extension would be to replace the Gaussian shape-fluctuation model with a realistic nucleon-nucleon correlation profile; if the extracted parameters shift, the method would still work but the physical interpretation would change.
  • The smooth-interpolation assumption used to locate $\langle\beta_3\rangle \approx 0.14$ and $\sigma_{\beta_3} \approx 0.06$ is our main reason to treat those numbers as indicative rather than final until full hydrodynamics runs on a grid confirm the curve.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Referee Report

2 major / 6 minor

Summary. Using the iEBE-VISHNU hybrid model with TRENTo initial conditions, the authors show that a Gaussian-distributed octupole deformation of 208Pb can simultaneously address the ultracentral v2/v3 ratio and the v3{4}/v3{2} ratio in Pb+Pb collisions at 5.02 TeV. Static octupole deformation (⟨β3⟩=0.15) and purely fluctuating octupole deformation (σβ3=0.15) both reproduce v2{2}/v3{2}, but only the fluctuating case is consistent with the ATLAS -c3{4}/c3{2}^2 data. Keeping the root-mean-square octupole deformation fixed at 0.15, the authors scan (⟨β3⟩,σβ3) combinations using initial-state TRENTo eccentricity cumulants and, under a smooth mapping assumption anchored to two full hydrodynamic endpoints, infer ⟨β3⟩≈0.14 and σβ3≈0.06. The paper argues that these transient shape fluctuations constitute a 'breathing' mode observable only in relativistic heavy-ion collisions.

Significance. If reliable, the result is significant because it identifies four-particle flow cumulants as a discriminator between static deformation and shape fluctuations and provides a new, time-resolved probe of nuclear structure: the inferred rms octupole deformation of 0.15 is consistent with the value needed to solve the v2/v3 puzzle, while the fluctuation width explains the v3{4} anomaly. The full hydrodynamic runs at the two limiting cases and the transparent separation of two- and four-particle cumulants are strengths, and the argument is not circular since v3{4} was not used to fix the rms deformation. The qualitative claim that a fluctuating octupole shape is favored is well supported; the quantitative extraction of σβ3 rests on an interpolation that is not yet validated.

major comments (2)
  1. [Results and discussions, Fig. 5] The quantitative extraction of σβ3 ≈ 0.06 is obtained by interpolating TRENTo initial-state eccentricity cumulant ratios between two full iEBE-VISHNU endpoints (σβ3=0 and 0.15). The text just before Fig. 4 states that the final-state ratio exhibits enhanced sensitivity relative to the initial-state ratio, 'suggesting a breakdown of the simplistic mapping from initial- to final-state cumulants when shape fluctuations are involved.' If the final-state response is nonlinear in σβ3, the interpolated crossing with the ATLAS data could occur at a substantially different σβ3, so the quoted (⟨β3⟩≈0.14, σβ3≈0.06) is not a robust extraction. I recommend either performing full hydrodynamic simulations at intermediate σβ3 (e.g., 0.05–0.10), or explicitly demoting the quoted values to an illustrative range and removing them from the abstract and conclusion.
  2. [Figs. 4 and 5, comparison to data] The simultaneous comparison mixes data with different acceptances and centralities: the v2{2}/v3{2} ratio is compared to ALICE 0–1% data (|η|<0.8), while -c3{4}/c3{2}^2 is compared to ATLAS 0–2% data (pT>0.5 GeV, |η|<2.5). Since the model parameters are calibrated to ALICE midrapidity flow, the slight overestimate of v2/v3 relative to ATLAS noted in the text is not quantified, and the central point in Fig. 5 may shift if both observables were evaluated in a common acceptance and centrality bin. Please state the acceptances in the figure captions and discuss the sensitivity of the inferred σβ3 to this mismatch.
minor comments (6)
  1. [Results and discussions, constraint] The text refers to 'Eq.(6)' when quoting the constraint sqrt(⟨β3⟩^2 + σβ3^2) = 0.15; this is Eq. (4).
  2. [Results and discussions, text] There is a typo, 'collisiosns', in the paragraph before Fig. 4.
  3. [Fig. 5 caption] The caption uses σ^2_{β3}=0 and 0.15 while the text uses σβ3; please make the notation consistent.
  4. [Fig. 5 caption and text] The body text describes the v2{2}/v3{2} data band in Fig. 5 as gray, while the caption calls it blue; please unify the description.
  5. [Model and setups, Eq. (3)] The Gaussian form P(β3) is an ad hoc prescription; the paper should state more explicitly that the inferred values depend on this choice and would benefit from a sensitivity test with a non-Gaussian distribution.
  6. [Figures 1–5] The figure captions should state the pT and rapidity acceptances for the ALICE and ATLAS data, since these currently appear only in the text.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the two-parameter breathing-mode model is constrained by two independent flow cumulant observables; the sigma_beta3 extraction is an acknowledged interpolation, not a by-construction identity.

full rationale

The derivation chain is self-contained. The Gaussian beta3-fluctuation model has two free parameters (<beta3>, sigma_beta3), which are constrained by two independent experimental inputs: the ultracentral v2{2}/v3{2} ratio (through the fitted rms sqrt(<beta3^2>) = 0.15) and the v3{4}/v3{2} cumulant ratio (through the location of the data between the static and fully fluctuating hydrodynamic limits). No step reduces an output to an input by definition: v3{4}/v3{2} is not the same observable as v2/v3, and Eq. (4) is a constraint on the sum of squares, not a tautology. The paper does not claim a parameter-free prediction; it explicitly labels the result a qualitative extraction and cautions that the quoted sigma_beta3 ~ 0.06 'should not be taken as precise extraction at current stage.' The only load-bearing approximation — the interpolation between two full-hydro endpoints using initial-state TRENTo cumulant ratios with a 'smooth correspondence' — is an acknowledged model assumption rather than a circular reduction, and the paper itself notes the 'breakdown of the simplistic mapping from initial- to final-state cumulants when shape fluctuations are involved,' which weakens the quantitative precision but does not make the reasoning circular. Self-citations are limited to background on isobar and uranium collisions and to the hydrodynamic code; none carry the central claim. Hence no circularity is identified.

Assumptions & free parameters 3 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper rests on a phenomenological Gaussian model for octupole fluctuations, a linear response assumption for the eccentricity-to-flow mapping, and a fixed hydrodynamic parameter set calibrated for spherical Pb. The two key parameters (mean beta3 and sigma_beta3) are fitted to the v2/v3 and v3{4} data rather than derived from first principles. No new particles, forces, or entities are introduced.

free parameters (3)
  • sqrt(<beta3^2>) (root-mean-square octupole deformation) = 0.15
    Chosen so that the v2{2}/v3{2} ratio matches data; Eq. (4) states the puzzle can be solved by any combination with this rms value.
  • <beta3> (mean octupole deformation) = ~0.14
    Extracted from v3{4}/v3{2} data via interpolation in Fig. 5; the paper says this should not be taken as precise.
  • sigma_beta3 (width of Gaussian beta3 fluctuation) = ~0.06
    Extracted from v3{4}/v3{2} data; discriminates static from fluctuating octupole.
assumptions (5)
  • ad hoc to paper Gaussian probability distribution for beta3 fluctuations, P(beta3) proportional to exp[-(beta3-<beta3>)^2/(2*sigma_beta3^2)]
    Assumed in Eq. (3) as a phenomenological model of shape breathing, motivated by configuration mixing in Refs. [44,48] but not derived here. The central results depend on this functional form.
  • domain assumption Linear response relation v_n proportional to epsilon_n (n=2,3) in ultracentral collisions
    Used in the Results section to justify computing eccentricity cumulants with TRENTo instead of full hydrodynamics. The paper notes a breakdown of this mapping when shape fluctuations are involved.
  • domain assumption Woods-Saxon parameterization of nuclear density with R = R0(1+beta2*Y20+beta3*Y30), with beta2=0 for 208Pb
    Standard nuclear density parameterization used in Eq. (2).
  • domain assumption Hydrodynamic parameters calibrated for spherical Pb in Ref. [65] remain valid for deformed/breathing Pb
    The paper uses the parameter set from Ref. [65] without recalibration; it acknowledges a full Bayesian calibration is needed.
  • ad hoc to paper Initial-state eccentricity cumulant ratios map smoothly to final-state flow cumulant ratios for intermediate sigma_beta3
    Used to interpolate between the two limiting full-hydro cases in Fig. 5. This is explicitly assumed and is questionable given the stated breakdown of the linear mapping.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A "breathing'' octupole $^{208}$Pb nucleus: resolving the elliptical-to-triangular azimuthal anisotropy puzzle in ultracentral relativistic heavy ion collisions." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/XLTUR323

@misc{pith2026250419644,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A "breathing'' octupole $^208$Pb nucleus: resolving the elliptical-to-triangular azimuthal anisotropy puzzle in ultracentral relativistic heavy ion collisions},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/XLTUR323}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.19644}
}
abstract

Relativistic heavy ion collisions provide a unique opportunity to probe the nuclear structure by taking an instantaneous snapshot of the colliding nuclei and converting it into momentum anisotropies of final emitted hadrons. A long-standing puzzle of too large a ratio of the elliptical-to-triangular ($v_{2}$-to-$v_{3}$) anisotropies in ultracentral $^{208}$Pb+$^{208}$Pb collisions at the Large Hadron Collider(LHC) cannot be solved simply by hydrodynamic simulations with initial conditions containing the spherical or certain deformed shape of $^{208}$Pb. In this Letter, using the iEBE-VISHNU relativistic viscous hydrodynamic hybrid model simulations with the Trento initial condition, we show that a dynamic octupole deformation--a shape-breathing of $^{208}$Pb --could potentially solve the $v_{2}$-to-$v_{3}$ puzzle and simultaneously describe the $v_3\{4\}$ data measured in experiment. Our results highlight the unique capability of capturing transient collective properties of nuclei on yoctosecond ($10^{-24}$~s) timescales, unfeasible with low-energy nuclear reactions.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2504.19644 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1. (Color online) (a) The [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2. (Color online) Similar to Fig [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3. (Color online) Four-particle cumulants in the most cen [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5. (Color online) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_5.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4. (Color online) (a) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 4 Pith papers

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

  1. Study the Longitudinal Entropy Deposition using d+Au Collision

    nucl-th 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    A 3D entropy deposition model with β≈0.35 and n_BC-dependent rapidity loss, plus ab initio deuteron sampling, reproduces d+Au dNch/dη, spectra, and vn and transfers to p+Au, 3He+Au, and Au+Au.

  2. Nonlinear collective flow reveals the breakdown of quadrupole--hexadecapole scaling in heavy ion collisions

    nucl-th 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    The nonlinear flow coefficient ξ6,222 in simulated U+U collisions separates the four (β2, β4) nuclear topology classes, making the sign of the hexadecapole deformation β4 experimentally accessible.

  3. Scaling approach to rigid and soft nuclear deformation through flow fluctuations in high-energy nuclear collisions

    nucl-th 2025-09 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Triangular flow four-particle cumulants scale linearly with the fourth moment of octupole deformation, allowing the mean and variance of 238U octupole deformation to be extracted separately.

  4. Nuclear Physics Confronts Relativistic Collisions Of Isobars

    nucl-ex 2025-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    RHIC isobar data are explained by different shapes of 96Ru and 96Zr, with 96Zr showing a large octupole deformation, so nuclear structure uncertainty, not the magnetic field, dominates the observed ratios.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

80 extracted references · 13 canonical work pages · cited by 4 Pith papers

  1. [1]

    Gyulassy and L

    M. Gyulassy and L. McLerran, New forms of QCD matter dis- covered at RHIC, Nucl. Phys. A 750, 30 (2005), arXiv:nucl- th/0405013

    arXiv 2005

  2. [2]

    Adcox et al

    K. Adcox et al. (PHENIX Collaboration), Formation of dense partonic matter in relativistic nucleus-nucleus collisions at RHIC: Experimental evaluation by the PHENIX collaboration, Nucl.Phys.A757, 184 (2005), arXiv:nucl-ex/0410003 [nucl-ex]

    arXiv 2005

  3. [3]

    B. B. Back et al. (PHOBOS), The PHOBOS perspective on discoveries at RHIC, Nucl. Phys. A757, 28 (2005), arXiv:nucl- ex/0410022

    arXiv 2005

  4. [4]

    Arsene et al

    I. Arsene et al. (BRAHMS), Quark gluon plasma and color glass condensate at RHIC? The Perspective from the BRAHMS ex- periment, Nucl. Phys. A 757, 1 (2005), arXiv:nucl-ex/0410020

    arXiv 2005

  5. [5]

    Adams et al

    J. Adams et al. (STAR Collaboration), Experimental and theo- retical challenges in the search for the quark gluon plasma: The STAR Collaboration’s critical assessment of the evidence from RHIC collisions, Nucl.Phys. A757, 102 (2005), arXiv:nucl- ex/0501009 [nucl-ex]

    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, 93 (2006), arXiv:nucl- th/0602029

    work page arXiv 2006

  7. [7]

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

    2012

  8. [8]

    Braun-Munzinger, V

    P. Braun-Munzinger, V. Koch, T. Sch¨afer, and J. Stachel, Proper- ties of hot and dense matter from relativistic heavy ion collisions, Phys. Rept. 621, 76 (2016), arXiv:1510.00442 [nucl-th]

    arXiv 2016

Show all 80 references
  1. [9]

    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, 035001 (2017), arXiv:1412.8393 [hep-ph]

    2017 arXiv

  2. [10]

    Acharya et al

    S. Acharya et al. (ALICE), The ALICE experiment: a journey through QCD, Eur. Phys. J. C84, 813 (2024), arXiv:2211.04384 [nucl-ex]. 6

    2024 arXiv

  3. [11]

    Ollitrault, Anisotropy as a signature of transverse collective flow, Phys.Rev.D46, 229 (1992)

    J.-Y. Ollitrault, Anisotropy as a signature of transverse collective flow, Phys.Rev.D46, 229 (1992)

    1992

  4. [12]

    P. F. Kolb and U. W. Heinz, Hydrodynamic description of ul- trarelativistic heavy ion collisions, , 634 (2003), arXiv:nucl- th/0305084

    2003

  5. [13]

    Voloshin and Y

    S. Voloshin and Y. Zhang, Flow study in relativistic nuclear col- lisions by Fourier expansion of Azimuthal particle distributions, Z. Phys. C 70, 665 (1996), arXiv:hep-ph/9407282

    1996 arXiv

  6. [14]

    Heinz and R

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

    2013 arXiv

  7. [15]

    C. Gale, S. Jeon, and B. Schenke, Hydrodynamic Modeling of Heavy-Ion Collisions, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A28, 1340011 (2013), arXiv:1301.5893 [nucl-th]

    2013 arXiv

  8. [16]

    Luzum and H

    M. Luzum and H. Petersen, Initial State Fluctuations and Final State Correlations in Relativistic Heavy-Ion Collisions, J. Phys. G 41, 063102 (2014), arXiv:1312.5503 [nucl-th]

    2014 arXiv

  9. [17]

    Song, Hydrodynamic modelling for relativistic heavy- ion collisions at RHIC and LHC, Pramana 84, 703 (2015), arXiv:1401.0079 [nucl-th]

    H. Song, Hydrodynamic modelling for relativistic heavy- ion collisions at RHIC and LHC, Pramana 84, 703 (2015), arXiv:1401.0079 [nucl-th]

    2015 arXiv

  10. [18]

    Jeon and U

    S. Jeon and U. Heinz, Introduction to Hydrodynamics, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 24, 1530010 (2015), arXiv:1503.03931 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  11. [19]

    H. Song, Y. Zhou, and K. Gajdosova, Collective flow and hy- drodynamics in large and small systems at the LHC, Nucl. Sci. Tech. 28, 99 (2017), arXiv:1703.00670 [nucl-th]

    2017 arXiv

  12. [20]

    Derradi de Souza, T

    R. Derradi de Souza, T. Koide, and T. Kodama, Hydrodynamic Approaches in Relativistic Heavy Ion Reactions, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 86, 35 (2016), arXiv:1506.03863 [nucl-th]

    2016 arXiv

  13. [21]

    Noronha-Hostler, L

    J. Noronha-Hostler, L. Yan, F. G. Gardim, and J.-Y. Ollitrault, Linear and cubic response to the initial eccentricity in heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 93, 014909 (2016), arXiv:1511.03896 [nucl-th]

    2016 arXiv

  14. [22]

    Noronha, B

    J. Noronha, B. Schenke, C. Shen, and W. Zhao, Progress and Challenges in Small Systems, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 33, 2430005 (2024), arXiv:2401.09208 [nucl-th]

    2024 arXiv

  15. [23]

    C. Shen, Z. Qiu, and U. Heinz, Shape and flow fluctuations in ultracentral Pb + Pb collisions at the energies available at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. C92, 014901 (2015), arXiv:1502.04636 [nucl-th]

    2015 arXiv

  16. [24]

    Aamodt et al

    K. Aamodt et al. (ALICE), Higher harmonic anisotropic flow measurements of charged particles in Pb-Pb collisions at √𝑠𝑁 𝑁 =2.76 TeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107, 032301 (2011), arXiv:1105.3865 [nucl-ex]

    2011 arXiv

  17. [25]

    Aad et al

    G. Aad et al. (ATLAS), Measurement of the azimuthal anisotropy for charged particle production in √𝑠𝑁 𝑁 = 2.76 TeV lead-lead collisions with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. C 86, 014907 (2012), arXiv:1203.3087 [hep-ex]

    2012 arXiv

  18. [26]

    Chatrchyan et al

    S. Chatrchyan et al. (CMS), Measurement of Higher-Order Har- monic Azimuthal Anisotropy in PbPb Collisions at √𝑠𝑁 𝑁 = 2.76 TeV, Phys. Rev. C 89, 044906 (2014), arXiv:1310.8651 [nucl-ex]

    2014 arXiv

  19. [27]

    Acharya et al

    S. Acharya et al. (ALICE), Energy dependence and fluctuations of anisotropic flow in Pb-Pb collisions at√𝑠NN = 5.02 and 2.76 TeV, JHEP07, 103, arXiv:1804.02944 [nucl-ex]

    arXiv

  20. [28]

    Aaboud et al

    M. Aaboud et al. (ATLAS), Fluctuations of anisotropic flow in Pb+Pb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV with the ATLAS detector, JHEP 01, 051, arXiv:1904.04808 [nucl-ex]

    1904 arXiv

  21. [29]

    H.-J. Xu, X. Wang, H. Li, J. Zhao, Z.-W. Lin, C. Shen, and F. Wang, Importance of isobar density distributions on the chiral magnetic effect search, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 022301 (2018), arXiv:1710.03086 [nucl-th]

    2018 arXiv

  22. [30]

    Li, H.-j

    H. Li, H.-j. Xu, Y. Zhou, X. Wang, J. Zhao, L.-W. Chen, and F. Wang, Probing the neutron skin with ultrarelativis- tic isobaric collisions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 222301 (2020), arXiv:1910.06170 [nucl-th]

    2020 arXiv

  23. [31]

    H.-j. Xu, W. Zhao, H. Li, Y. Zhou, L.-W. Chen, and F. Wang, Probing nuclear structure with mean transverse momentum in relativistic isobar collisions, Phys. Rev. C108, L011902 (2023), arXiv:2111.14812 [nucl-th]

    2023 arXiv

  24. [32]

    Ryssens, G

    W. Ryssens, G. Giacalone, B. Schenke, and C. Shen, Evidence of Hexadecapole Deformation in Uranium-238 at the Relativis- tic Heavy Ion Collider, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 212302 (2023), arXiv:2302.13617 [nucl-th]

    2023 arXiv

  25. [33]

    H.-j. Xu, J. Zhao, and F. Wang, Hexadecapole Deformation of U238 from Relativistic Heavy-Ion Collisions Using a Nonlin- ear Response Coefficient, Phys. Rev. Lett. 132, 262301 (2024), arXiv:2402.16550 [nucl-th]

    2024 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Carzon, S

    P. Carzon, S. Rao, M. Luzum, M. Sievert, and J. Noronha- Hostler, Possible octupole deformation of 208Pb and the ul- tracentral 𝑣2 to 𝑣3 puzzle, Phys. Rev. C 102, 054905 (2020), arXiv:2007.00780 [nucl-th]

    2020 arXiv

  27. [35]

    B. G. Zakharov, Collective nuclear vibrations and initial state shape fluctuations in central Pb+Pb collisions: resolving the 𝑣2 to 𝑣3 puzzle, JETP Lett. 112, 393 (2020), arXiv:2008.07304 [nucl-th]

    2020 arXiv

  28. [36]

    B. G. Zakharov, Influence of Collective Nuclear Vibrations on Initial State Eccentricities in Pb + Pb Collisions, J. Exp. Theor. Phys. 134, 669 (2022), arXiv:2112.06066 [nucl-th]

    2022 arXiv

  29. [37]

    U. W. Heinz and A. Kuhlman, Anisotropic flow and jet quench- ing in ultrarelativistic U + U collisions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 132301 (2005), arXiv:nucl-th/0411054

    2005 arXiv

  30. [38]

    Giacalone, J

    G. Giacalone, J. Jia, and C. Zhang, Impact of Nuclear Defor- mation on Relativistic Heavy-Ion Collisions: Assessing Consis- tency in Nuclear Physics across Energy Scales, Phys. Rev. Lett. 127, 242301 (2021), arXiv:2105.01638 [nucl-th]

    2021 arXiv

  31. [39]

    Niemi, G

    H. Niemi, G. S. Denicol, H. Holopainen, and P. Huovinen, Event-by-event distributions of azimuthal asymmetries in ultra- relativistic heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C87, 054901 (2013), arXiv:1212.1008 [nucl-th]

    2013 arXiv

  32. [40]

    C. Gale, S. Jeon, B. Schenke, P. Tribedy, and R. Venugopalan, Event-by-event anisotropic flow in heavy-ion collisions from combined Yang-Mills and viscous fluid dynamics, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 012302 (2013), arXiv:1209.6330 [nucl-th]

    2013 arXiv

  33. [41]

    A. M. Poskanzer and S. A. Voloshin, Methods for analyzing anisotropic flow in relativistic nuclear collisions, Phys. Rev. C 58, 1671 (1998), arXiv:nucl-ex/9805001

    1998 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Borghini, P

    N. Borghini, P. M. Dinh, and J.-Y. Ollitrault, A New method for measuring azimuthal distributions in nucleus-nucleus collisions, Phys. Rev. C63, 054906 (2001), arXiv:nucl-th/0007063

    2001 arXiv

  35. [43]

    Bilandzic, R

    A. Bilandzic, R. Snellings, and S. Voloshin, Flow analysis with cumulants: Direct calculations, Phys.Rev. C83, 044913 (2011), arXiv:1010.0233 [nucl-ex]

    2011 arXiv

  36. [44]

    P. A. Butler and W. Nazarewicz, Intrinsic reflection asymmetry in atomic nuclei, Rev. Mod. Phys.68, 349 (1996)

    1996

  37. [45]

    L. M. Robledo, Enhancement of octupole strength in near spher- ical nuclei, Eur. Phys. J. A 52, 300 (2016), arXiv:2003.08122 [nucl-th]

    2016 arXiv

  38. [46]

    Poves, F

    A. Poves, F. Nowacki, and Y. Alhassid, Limits on assign- ing a shape to a nucleus, Phys. Rev. C 101, 054307 (2020), arXiv:1906.07542 [nucl-th]

    2020 arXiv

  39. [47]

    J. M. Yao and K. Hagino, Anharmonicity of multi–octupole- phonon excitations in 208Pb: Analysis with multireference covariant density functional theory and subbarrier fusion of 16O+208Pb, Phys. Rev. C94, 011303 (2016), arXiv:1607.02126 [nucl-th]

    2016 arXiv

  40. [48]

    Henderson et al., Deformation and Collectivity in Doubly Magic Pb208, Phys

    J. Henderson et al., Deformation and Collectivity in Doubly Magic Pb208, Phys. Rev. Lett.134, 062502 (2025)

    2025

  41. [49]

    Li, L.-W

    B.-A. Li, L.-W. Chen, and C. M. Ko, Recent Progress and New 7 Challenges in Isospin Physics with Heavy-Ion Reactions, Phys. Rept. 464, 113 (2008), arXiv:0804.3580 [nucl-th]

    2008 arXiv

  42. [50]

    C. J. Horowitz and J. Piekarewicz, Neutron star structure and the neutron radius of Pb-208, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5647 (2001), arXiv:astro-ph/0010227

    2001 arXiv

  43. [51]

    M. B. Tsang et al., Constraints on the symmetry energy and neutron skins from experiments and theory, Phys. Rev. C 86, 015803 (2012), arXiv:1204.0466 [nucl-ex]

    2012 arXiv

  44. [52]

    Adhikari et al

    D. Adhikari et al. (PREX), Accurate Determination of the Neutron Skin Thickness of 208Pb through Parity-Violation in Electron Scattering, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126, 172502 (2021), arXiv:2102.10767 [nucl-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  45. [53]

    Giacalone, G

    G. Giacalone, G. Nijs, and W. van der Schee, Determination of the Neutron Skin of Pb208 from Ultrarelativistic Nuclear Col- lisions, Phys. Rev. Lett.131, 202302 (2023), arXiv:2305.00015 [nucl-th]

    2023 arXiv

  46. [54]

    Ritman et al., First observation of the Coulomb-excited dou- ble giant dipole resonance in Pb-208 via double-gamma decay, Phys

    J. Ritman et al., First observation of the Coulomb-excited dou- ble giant dipole resonance in Pb-208 via double-gamma decay, Phys. Rev. Lett.70, 533 (1993)

    1993

  47. [55]

    Heyde and J

    K. Heyde and J. L. Wood, Shape coexistence in atomic nuclei, Rev. Mod. Phys.83, 1467 (2011)

    2011

  48. [56]

    H. Song, S. A. Bass, and U. Heinz, Viscous QCD matter in a hybrid hydrodynamic+Boltzmann approach, Phys. Rev. C 83, 024912 (2011), arXiv:1012.0555 [nucl-th]

    2011 arXiv

  49. [57]

    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, 61 (2016), arXiv:1409.8164 [nucl-th]

    2016 arXiv

  50. [58]

    J. S. Moreland, J. E. Bernhard, and S. A. Bass, Alternative ansatz to wounded nucleon and binary collision scaling in high- energy nuclear collisions, Phys. Rev. C 92, 011901 (2015), arXiv:1412.4708 [nucl-th]

    2015 arXiv

  51. [59]

    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, 024907 (2016), arXiv:1605.03954 [nucl-th]

    2016 arXiv

  52. [60]

    U. W. Heinz, H. Song, and A. K. Chaudhuri, Dissipative hydro- dynamics for viscous relativistic fluids, Phys. Rev. C73, 034904 (2006), arXiv:nucl-th/0510014

    2006 arXiv

  53. [61]

    Song and U

    H. Song and U. W. Heinz, Causal viscous hydrodynamics in 2+1 dimensions for relativistic heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 77, 064901 (2008), arXiv:0712.3715 [nucl-th]

    2008 arXiv

  54. [62]

    Song and U

    H. Song and U. W. Heinz, Suppression of elliptic flow in a minimally viscous quark-gluon plasma, Phys. Lett. B 658, 279 (2008), arXiv:0709.0742 [nucl-th]

    2008 arXiv

  55. [63]

    S. A. Bass et al., Microscopic models for ultrarelativistic heavy ion collisions, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.41, 255 (1998), [Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys.41,225(1998)], arXiv:nucl-th/9803035 [nucl-th]

    1998 arXiv

  56. [64]

    Bleicher et al., Relativistic hadron hadron collisions in the ultrarelativistic quantum molecular dynamics model, J

    M. Bleicher et al., Relativistic hadron hadron collisions in the ultrarelativistic quantum molecular dynamics model, J. Phys. G25, 1859 (1999), arXiv:hep-ph/9909407 [hep-ph]

    1999 arXiv

  57. [65]

    J. S. Moreland, J. E. Bernhard, and S. A. Bass, Bayesian calibra- tion of a hybrid nuclear collision model using p-Pb and Pb-Pb data at energies available at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. C101, 024911 (2020), arXiv:1808.02106 [nucl-th]

    2020 arXiv

  58. [66]

    Adam et al

    J. Adam et al. (ALICE), Centrality Dependence of the Charged- Particle Multiplicity Density at Midrapidity in Pb-Pb Collisions at√𝑠NN = 5.02 TeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 222302 (2016), arXiv:1512.06104 [nucl-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  59. [67]

    Adam et al

    J. Adam et al. (ALICE), Anisotropic flow of charged particles in Pb-Pb collisions at√𝑠NN = 5.02 TeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 132302 (2016), arXiv:1602.01119 [nucl-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  60. [68]

    Wang, L.-G

    Q. Wang, L.-G. Pang, and X.-N. Wang, Impact of Initial-State Nuclear and Sub-Nucleon Structures on Ultra-Central Puzzle in Heavy Ion Collisions, (2025), arXiv:2504.19208 [nucl-th]

    2025 arXiv

  61. [69]

    A. V. Giannini, M. N. Ferreira, M. Hippert, D. D. Chinellato, G. S. Denicol, M. Luzum, J. Noronha, T. Nunes da Silva, and J. Takahashi (ExTrEMe), Assessing the ultracentral flow puzzle in hydrodynamic modeling of heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 107, 044907 (2023), arXiv:220...

    2023 arXiv

  62. [70]

    Kuroki, A

    K. Kuroki, A. Sakai, K. Murase, and T. Hirano, Hydrodynamic fluctuations and ultra-central flow puzzle in heavy-ion collisions, Phys. Lett. B 842, 137958 (2023), arXiv:2305.01977 [nucl-th]

    2023 arXiv

  63. [71]

    F. G. Gardim, J. Noronha-Hostler, M. Luzum, and F. Grassi, Ef- fects of viscosity on the mapping of initial to final state in heavy ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C91, 034902 (2015), arXiv:1411.2574 [nucl-th]

    2015 arXiv

  64. [72]

    Alqahtani, R

    M. Alqahtani, R. S. Bhalerao, G. Giacalone, A. Kirchner, and J.-Y. Ollitrault, Impact parameter dependence of anisotropic flow: Bayesian reconstruction in ultracentral nucleus-nucleus collisions, Phys. Rev. C110, 064906 (2024), arXiv:2407.17308 [nucl-th]

    2024 arXiv

  65. [73]

    Feng and F

    Y. Feng and F. Wang, Review of nonflow estimation methods and uncertainties in relativistic heavy-ion collisions, J. Phys. G 52, 013001 (2025), arXiv:2407.12731 [nucl-ex]

    2025 arXiv

  66. [74]

    Dimri, S

    A. Dimri, S. Bhatta, and J. Jia, Impact of nuclear shape fluctua- tions in high-energy heavy ion collisions, Eur. Phys. J. A59, 45 (2023), arXiv:2301.03556 [nucl-th]

    2023 arXiv

  67. [75]

    G. Giacalone et al., The unexpected uses of a bowling pin: exploiting 20Ne isotopes for precision characterizations of col- lectivity in small systems, (2024), arXiv:2402.05995 [nucl-th]

    2024 arXiv

  68. [76]

    M. I. Abdulhamid et al. (STAR), Imaging shapes of atomic nuclei in high-energy nuclear collisions, Nature635, 67 (2024), arXiv:2401.06625 [nucl-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  69. [77]

    Zhao, H.-j

    S. Zhao, H.-j. Xu, Y. Zhou, Y.-X. Liu, and H. Song, Explor- ing the Nuclear Shape Phase Transition in Ultra-Relativistic 129Xe+129Xe Collisions at the LHC, Phys. Rev. Lett. 133, 192301 (2024), arXiv:2403.07441 [nucl-th]

    2024 arXiv

  70. [78]

    Giacalone et al., Anisotropic Flow in Fixed-Target Pb208+Ne20 Collisions as a Probe of Quark-Gluon Plasma, Phys

    G. Giacalone et al., Anisotropic Flow in Fixed-Target Pb208+Ne20 Collisions as a Probe of Quark-Gluon Plasma, Phys. Rev. Lett. 134, 082301 (2025), arXiv:2405.20210 [nucl- th]

    2025 arXiv

  71. [79]

    M ¨antysaari, B

    H. M ¨antysaari, B. Schenke, C. Shen, and W. Zhao, Probing nuclear structure of heavy ions at energies available at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. C110, 054913 (2024), arXiv:2409.19064 [nucl-th]

    2024 arXiv

  72. [80]

    Simenel, K

    C. Simenel, K. Godbey, and A. S. Umar, Timescales of quantum equilibration, dissipation and fluctuation in nuclear collisions, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, 212504 (2020), arXiv:2005.04357 [nucl- th]

    2020 arXiv

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.