Pith. sign in

REVIEW 2 major objections 5 minor 48 references

Multiplicity dependence of K$^*(892)^{\pm}$ production in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV

T0 review · 2 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read The paper reports the first clear observation of $K^*(892)^{\pm}$/$K_S^0$ suppression with event multiplicity in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV, measured at $7\sigma$ significance.

desk verdict First multiplicity-differential K*(892)± measurement in pp at 13 TeV; the 7σ K*/KS suppression is a real new result, with one load-bearing correction assumption the paper checks but doesn't show. read the letter →

arxiv 2507.19332 v1 pith:7W6DSK57 submitted 2025-07-25 nucl-ex hep-ex

ALICE Collaboration This is my paper · ORCID
classification nucl-exhep-ex
keywords K*(892)resonanceproton-protoncollisionsmultiplicitydependenceK*/K_S0yieldratiosuppressionhadronicphaserescatteringcore-coronahadronization
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 tries to establish that the yield of the short-lived $K^*(892)^{\pm}$ resonance relative to the longer-lived $K_S^0$ decreases as proton-proton collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV become more multiply populated, with the drop measured at $7\sigma$ significance. The suppression is concentrated at low transverse momentum: for $p_{\rm T}\lesssim 2$ GeV/$c$, the ratio of high-multiplicity to low-multiplicity yields deviates from unity by more than $3\sigma$. If the result holds, it would mean that resonance suppression, a signature usually associated with rescattering in the hadronic medium formed in heavy-ion collisions, also occurs in small collision systems, pointing to a short-lived hadronic phase in pp events. The paper also shows that EPOS-LHC reproduces the trend without any hadronic afterburner, so the effect does not uniquely require rescattering as usually modeled.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing observable is the ratio of the $K^*(892)^{\pm}$ yield to the $K_S^0$ yield, where $K^*(892)^{\pm}$ is a short-lived vector meson ($\tau\approx 4$ fm/$c$) reconstructed via $K^{*\pm}\to \pi^\pm + K_S^0$ and $K_S^0\to \pi^+\pi^-$. The denominator is a long-lived ground-state particle with similar quark content, so the ratio cancels common production factors and isolates resonance-specific losses. The paper extracts raw yields from $K_S^0\pi^\pm$ invariant-mass fits after event-mixing background subtraction, corrects them with acceptance-times-efficiency from a multiplicity-integrated simulation, and then forms the high-to-low multiplicity double ratio with per-class uncorrelated systematic uncertainties.

What would settle it

Recompute the corrected yields using acceptance-times-efficiency evaluated separately in each V0M multiplicity class; if the high-to-low K*/$K_S^0$ ratio then moves toward unity by more than the quoted uncertainties, the 7σ suppression claim would be refuted.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that, in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}=13$ TeV, the $K^{*\pm}/K_S^0$ yield ratio falls from the lowest (70–100% V0M) to the highest (0–1%) multiplicity class, a suppression of $7\sigma$ accounting for multiplicity-uncorrelated uncertainties; this is the first observation of K*/K suppression in a small collision system, upgrading the previous $\approx 2\sigma$ hint from neutral $K^{*0}$. The $p_{\rm T}$-differential double ratio (highest multiplicity divided by lowest) is consistent with unity above about 2.5 GeV/$c$ and lies below unity by more than $3\sigma$ for $p_{\rm T}\lesssim 2$ GeV/$c$, indicating that the suppression acts mainly on low-$p_{\rm T}$ resonances. The paper’s own interpretation connects this to rescattering of decay products in a brief hadronic phase, while noting that EPOS-LHC, which contains no hadronic afterburner, reproduces the multiplicity trend through its core-corona treatment, leaving the physical origin open.

Load-bearing premise

The correction for detector acceptance and reconstruction efficiency is computed in the multiplicity-integrated INEL>0 class and then applied to every multiplicity class, based on the paper’s statement that no multiplicity dependence of the correction is observed; if that statement is wrong, the per-class yields and the 7σ suppression would be biased.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • The previous 2σ hint from neutral $K^{*0}$ becomes a 7σ effect in the charged channel, making resonance suppression a quantitative observable in pp collisions.
  • Any successful model of pp collisions must reproduce a low-$p_{\rm T}$-concentrated K*/K decrease with multiplicity, not just an overall yield growth.
  • Because EPOS-LHC matches the trend without a hadronic afterburner, the suppression can no longer be taken by itself as proof of a hadronic phase in pp events; it also constrains core-corona hadronization models.
  • The measured yields and ratios can be used as input for estimating hadronic-phase lifetimes in small systems, extending the heavy-ion-based estimates to pp collisions.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the same analysis were repeated in p–Pb collisions at the same center-of-mass energy per nucleon, the multiplicity trend would show whether the suppression scales with charged-particle density or with collision-system size; the paper stops at pp.
  • A systematic comparison of resonances with different lifetimes ($\rho(770)^0$, $\Lambda(1520)$, $\phi(1020)$) in the same pp dataset would map suppression as a function of lifetime, separating rescattering from regeneration and from color-reconnection effects.
  • A direct check of the multiplicity-independence assumption would be to publish per-class acceptance-times-efficiency tables, letting independent analyses recompute the corrected ratios from the same raw yields.
  • One testable prediction implied by the paper’s core-corona/EPOS-LHC agreement is that the suppression should appear already at moderate multiplicities rather than only in the extreme 0–1% bin; future binned data can check that.
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 / 5 minor

Summary. The ALICE Collaboration reports the first measurement of K*(892)+- production at midrapidity (|y|<0.5) in pp collisions at sqrt(s)=13 TeV as a function of event multiplicity. The K*+/- is reconstructed via K*+/- -> pi+/- + K_S^0, with the K_S^0 reconstructed through its V0 topology. Raw yields are extracted from same-event invariant-mass distributions after subtracting an event-mixing background, with a non-relativistic Breit-Wigner plus an ad-hoc residual-background function used for the peak description. Corrections include a PYTHIA8+GEANT based acceptance-times-efficiency (A x epsilon), a per-class signal-loss correction f_SL, and a systematic-uncertainty budget split into correlated and uncorrelated sources. The paper reports pT-differential spectra, pT-integrated yields, mean pT, and K*+/K_S^0 ratios as a function of multiplicity, comparing with PYTHIA6, PYTHIA8, EPOS-LHC, and DIPSY. The central claim is a 7-sigma suppression of K*+/K_S^0 from low to high multiplicity, interpreted as the first clear observation of K*/K suppression in a small collision system, with the suppression concentrated at pT below about 2 GeV/c (double ratio deviating by more than 3 sigma from unity).

Significance. If the result holds, it establishes a multiplicity-dependent resonance suppression in pp collisions with far better precision than the earlier ~2 sigma hint from the K*(892)^0 channel, and it sharpens the empirical constraints on the possible existence and duration of a hadronic phase in small collision systems. The analysis is in several respects careful and model-independent in the relevant sense: the K*/K_S ratio is built from measured yields, the event-mixing background subtraction and the systematic budget with correlated/uncorrelated separation are standard and well documented, and the model comparisons are not fits that could by construction imprint the observed trend. The main risk is not circularity but a data-dependent correction assumption: the claim that A x epsilon is multiplicity independent is asserted but not quantitatively demonstrated, and the denominator K_S^0 yields come from a separate analysis with its own corrections. These points, if resolved, do not appear to invalidate the measurement but are required before the 7-sigma claim can be fully assessed.

major comments (2)
  1. [Sec. 3.2] The claim that the acceptance-times-efficiency correction has no multiplicity dependence is load-bearing but is not substantiated in this manuscript. The text states that per-class A x epsilon values are consistent with the inclusive INEL>0 correction and refers to Fig. 2 of Ref. [20], but that figure shows the inclusive correction, not the per-class values; no per-class A x epsilon values, compatibility test, or uncertainty on the flatness are reported. Because the K*+/- yields in every multiplicity class are corrected with the multiplicity-integrated A x epsilon, a residual multiplicity slope in the tracking or V0-finding efficiency would propagate directly into the K*+/K_S^0 ratios and the central 7-sigma suppression claim. The correlated systematic sources in Table 2 (for example the 1.3-2.5% global tracking efficiency) are treated as fully correlated across classes and therefore cancel in the ratio, so they do not protect against a multiplicity-dependent efficiency slope. The authors should report the per-class A x epsilon values and their uncertainties, or quantify the maximum possible multiplicity slope and assign an appropriate uncorrelated systematic uncertainty.
  2. [Sec. 4 (Fig. 4)] The denominator of the central ratio, the K_S^0 yield, is taken from Ref. [32], which is a separate analysis with its own acceptance, efficiency, event-selection, and signal-loss corrections. The manuscript does not discuss how the K*+/- and K_S^0 corrections are harmonized with respect to the V0M class definitions, the rapidity coverage, the f_SL treatment, or the per-class efficiencies. Any mismatch between the two analyses' corrections enters the K*+/K_S^0 ratio directly and therefore affects both the magnitude of the suppression and the quoted 7-sigma significance. The authors should state explicitly how the denominator corrections were matched to those used for the K*+/- numerator, or estimate a systematic uncertainty for the possible mismatch.
minor comments (5)
  1. [Sec. 3.2] The sentence stating that the tail correction 'accounts for about 13% of the yield' does not indicate whether this fraction varies across pT and multiplicity bins or whether it carries an uncertainty; a short statement would help.
  2. [Sec. 3.2] The differential-yield formula is not reproduced in this paper; it is only referenced as Eq. 3 of Ref. [20]. Including the formula, or at least the explicit correction factors, would make the analysis self-contained.
  3. [Sec. 4 (Fig. 5)] The definition of the significance shown in the lower panel of Fig. 5 is implicit; please state explicitly whether it is the signed deviation of the double ratio from unity divided by the quadrature sum of statistical and multiplicity-uncorrelated systematic uncertainties, and whether the pT bins are treated as independent.
  4. [Sec. 3.3] Table 2 quotes multiplicity-averaged systematic uncertainties; since the 7-sigma claim is based on the uncorrelated part, showing the per-class uncorrelated uncertainties or at least their range would allow the reader to reproduce the significance statement.
  5. [Sec. 2 and Sec. 4] The notation 'INEL > 0' is sometimes written 'INEL>0' and the V0M class labels are introduced in Table 1 but not always defined at first use in figure captions; a consistent notation would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the K*±/K_S^0 ratio and its multiplicity trend are direct measurements, not outputs of a fitted model.

full rationale

The central observable is the efficiency-corrected K*± yield divided by the K_S^0 yield, both measured from ALICE data: the numerator is obtained from the same-event K_S^0π± invariant-mass distribution after mixed-event background subtraction, and the denominator is the published K_S^0 yield in the same pp system. The 7σ claim compares the ratio in the highest (I) and lowest (X) V0M classes; this is a direct ratio of measured, corrected yields, not a parameter extracted by fitting any model. The PYTHIA6/8, EPOS-LHC, and DIPSY comparisons are external generator predictions with no parameters tuned to the data points being compared; the Monte Carlo enters only through A×ε, fSL, and vertex-efficiency corrections, which are standard detector-level corrections. The stated assumption that A×ε is multiplicity-independent (Sec. 3.2) is a systematic/statistical premise that could affect the result if inaccurate, but it is not a circular reduction: the corrected K*/K ratio is not constructed to equal the assumed A×ε, and no fitted input is renamed as a prediction. Citations to previous ALICE analyses (e.g., Refs. [19, 20, 32]) supply the K_S^0 denominator, selection recipes, and the published inclusive efficiency; they are external published analyses, not the claim being derived. Hence no self-definitional, fitted-prediction, or self-citation-chain circularity is present.

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

The measurement uses standard experimental techniques and external inputs. The main model-dependent step is the efficiency correction from a PYTHIA8+GEANT3 simulation; the analysis also assumes multiplicity independence of this correction and compatibility of the K_S reference from an earlier ALICE paper. The signal extraction relies on several hand-chosen fit and normalization windows, which are varied for systematic uncertainties.

free parameters (3)
  • Residual background fit parameters n, A, B, C = Fitted per pT/multiplicity bin, values not quoted
    The residual background under the K* peak is subtracted using Eq. 2; the yield is sensitive to these values, so variants (polynomials) are used for systematic uncertainty.
  • Mixed-event background normalization range = 1.1 to 1.2 GeV/c²
    Used to scale the mixed-event background to the same-event distribution; varied for systematic uncertainty.
  • Signal integration window = M0 ± 2Γ0 (0.79 to 0.99 GeV/c²)
    Raw yield is integrated in this window, and the tail correction depends on the window choice; it is varied for systematics.
assumptions (5)
  • domain assumption PDG values for masses, width, and branching fractions are accurate.
    Used to fix the resonance peak, width, and conversion of yields (Sec. 3.1, Sec. 3.2).
  • domain assumption The ALICE Monte Carlo simulation (PYTHIA8 Monash + GEANT3) accurately describes track reconstruction and detector response.
    Used to compute acceptance-times-efficiency and signal-loss corrections (Sec. 3.2).
  • domain assumption Acceptance-times-efficiency is multiplicity independent, so the INEL>0 correction applies to all V0M classes.
    Stated in Sec. 3.2; if false, multiplicity trends in yields and ratios would be biased.
  • domain assumption K_S^0 yields from Ref. [32] use compatible multiplicity classes and can be directly used as the denominator of the ratio.
    The K*/K_S ratio (Fig. 4) combines the present K*± measurement with K_S from an earlier ALICE paper; dNch/dη values are stated as consistent but come from different datasets.
  • domain assumption The classification of systematic uncertainties into correlated and uncorrelated across multiplicity classes is correct.
    The 7-sigma significance uses only multiplicity-uncorrelated uncertainties; if the correlation assignment is wrong, the significance could change (Sec. 3.3, Sec. 4).

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Multiplicity dependence of K$^*(892)^{\pm}$ production in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/7W6DSK57

@misc{pith2026250719332,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Multiplicity dependence of K$^*(892)^\pm$ production in pp collisions at $\sqrts$ = 13 TeV},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/7W6DSK57}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2507.19332}
}
abstract

The first results of K$^*$(892)$^{\pm}$ production at midrapidity ($|y| < 0.5$) in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 13$ TeV as a function of the event multiplicity are presented. The K$^*$(892)$^{\pm}$ has been reconstructed via its hadronic decay channel K$^*$(892)$^{\pm} \rightarrow \pi^{\pm} + K_{\rm S}^0$ using the ALICE detector at the LHC. For each multiplicity class the differential transverse momentum ($p_{\rm T}$) spectrum, the mean transverse momentum $\langle p_{\rm T} \rangle$, the $p_{\rm T}$-integrated yield (d$N$/d$y$), and the ratio of the K$^*$(892)$^{\pm}$ to $K_{\rm S}^0$ yields are reported. These are consistent with previous K$^*$(892)$^0$ resonance results with a higher level of precision. Comparisons with phenomenological models such as PYTHIA6, PYTHIA8, EPOS-LHC, and DIPSY are also discussed. A first evidence of a significant K$^*$(892)$^{\pm}$/$K_{\rm S}^0$ suppression in pp collisions is observed at a 7$\sigma$ level passing from low to high multiplicity events. The ratios of the $p_{\rm T}$-differential yields of K$^*$(892)$^{\pm}$ and $K_{\rm S}^0$ in high and low multiplicity events are also presented along with their double ratio. For $p_{\rm T} \lesssim 2$ GeV/$c$ this double ratio persists below unity by more than $3\sigma$ suggesting that the suppression affects mainly low $p_{\rm T}$ resonances. The measured decreasing trend of the K$^*$(892)$^{\pm}$/$K_{\rm S}^0$ ratio with increasing multiplicity, which in heavy-ion collisions is typically attributed to the rescattering of decay particles of the short-lived resonances, is reproduced by the EPOS-LHC model without the use of hadronic afterburners.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2507.19332 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. The K0 S π ± invariant mass distribution at |y| < 0.5 in pp collisions at √ s = 13 TeV for the 1.6 < pT < 2.0 GeV/c interval in the VI V0M multiplicity class (black full circles), before (upper panel) and after (lower panel) the uncorrelated background subtraction. Statistical uncertainties are shown with error bars. In the upper panel the red open circles describe the background shape evaluated via the event-mixing… view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. The K∗± and K∗0 [19] pT distributions in pp collisions at √ s = 13 TeV for the different multiplicity classes studied, scaled by the indicated factors. Lower panel: ratios of the pT spectra in each multiplicity class to the multiplicity-integrated INEL> 0 spectrum. tegrating and averaging the transverse momentum spectra over the measured range (0 < pT < 10 GeV/c) [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. The per-event pT-integrated yields dN/dy (upper panel) and mean transverse momenta ⟨pT⟩(lower panel) for K∗± and K∗0 [19] as a function of the average charged-particle multiplicity density ⟨dNch/dη⟩|η|<0.5 . Bars represent statistical uncertainties, open boxes represent total systematic uncertainties, and shaded boxes are the systematic uncertainties uncorrelated with multiplicity. Symbol dimension represents the av… view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (2 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: Ratios of K∗±/K0 S and K∗0 /K0 S [19] yields in pp collisions at √ s = 13 TeV as a function of the average charged-particle multiplicity density at midrapidity ⟨dNch/dη⟩|η|<0.5 . Bars represent statistical uncertainties, open boxes represent total systematic uncertaint…
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: Upper panel: ratios of K∗±/K0 S as a function of pT for low (X) and high (I) multiplicity classes. Pre￾dictions for PYTHIA8 - Monash2013 (dashed lines) and EPOS-LHC (continuous lines) are also reported. Middle panel: the highest multiplicity K∗±/K0 S ratio divided by t…

Review history (2 revisions) →

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

48 extracted references · 20 canonical work pages

  1. [20]

    Measurement of K$^{*}$(892)$^{\mathrm{\pm}}$ production in inelastic pp collisions at the LHC

    ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Measurement of K∗(892)± production in inelastic pp collisions at the LHC”, Phys. Lett. B 828 (2022) 137013, arXiv:2105.05760 [nucl-ex]

    work page Pith review arXiv 2022

  2. [32]

    Multiplicity dependence of (multi-)strange hadron production in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Multiplicity dependence of (multi-)strange hadron production in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C80 (2020) 167, arXiv:1908.01861 [nucl-ex]

    arXiv 2020

  3. [1]

    The ALICE experiment – A journey through QCD

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

    arXiv 2024

  4. [2]

    Enhanced production of multi-strange hadrons in high-multiplicity proton-proton collisions

    ALICE Collaboration, J. Adam et al., “Enhanced production of multi-strange hadrons in high-multiplicity proton-proton collisions”, Nature Phys. 13 (2017) 535–539, arXiv:1606.07424 [nucl-ex]

    arXiv 2017

  5. [3]

    Multiplicity dependence of π, K, and p production in pp collisions at√s = 13 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Multiplicity dependence of π, K, and p production in pp collisions at√s = 13 TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C80 (2020) 693, arXiv:2003.02394 [nucl-ex]

    arXiv 2020

  6. [4]

    Multiplicity dependence of light-flavor hadron production in pp collisions at√s = 7 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Multiplicity dependence of light-flavor hadron production in pp collisions at√s = 7 TeV”, Phys. Rev. C 99 (2019) 024906, arXiv:1807.11321 [nucl-ex]

    arXiv 2019

  7. [5]

    Investigations of Anisotropic Flow Using Multiparticle Azimuthal Correlations in pp, p–Pb, Xe–Xe, and Pb–Pb Collisions at the LHC

    ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Investigations of Anisotropic Flow Using Multiparticle Azimuthal Correlations in pp, p–Pb, Xe–Xe, and Pb–Pb Collisions at the LHC”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123 (2019) 142301, arXiv:1903.01790 [nucl-ex]

    arXiv 2019

  8. [6]

    Equation of state in (2 + 1)-flavor QCD

    HotQCD Collaboration, A. Bazavov et al., “Equation of state in (2 + 1)-flavor QCD”, Phys. Rev. C 90 (2014) 094503, arXiv:1407.6387 [hep-lat]

    arXiv 2014

Show all 48 references
  1. [7]

    Full result for the QCD equation of state with 2+1 flavors

    S. Borsányi et al., “Full result for the QCD equation of state with 2+1 flavors”, Phys. Lett. B 730 (2014) 99, arXiv:1309.5258 [hep-lat] . 15 Multiplicity dependence of K∗(892)± ALICE Collaboration

    2014 arXiv

  2. [8]

    Formation and decay of hadronic resonances in the QGP

    R. Markert, C. Bellwied and I. Vitev, “Formation and decay of hadronic resonances in the QGP”, Phys. Lett. B 669 (2008) 92–97

    2008

  3. [9]

    Resonances as a possible observable of hot and dense nuclear matter

    S. V ogelet al., “Resonances as a possible observable of hot and dense nuclear matter”, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 37 (2010) 094046

    2010

  4. [10]

    Production of the ρ(770)0 meson in pp and Pb–Pb collisions at√sNN = 2.76 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Production of the ρ(770)0 meson in pp and Pb–Pb collisions at√sNN = 2.76 TeV”, Phys. Rev. C 99 (2019) 064901, arXiv:1805.04365 [nucl-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  5. [11]

    Production of K∗(892)0 and φ (1020) in pp and Pb–Pb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Production of K∗(892)0 and φ (1020) in pp and Pb–Pb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV”, Phys. Rev. C 106 (2022) 034907, arXiv:2106.13113 [nucl-ex]

    2022 arXiv

  6. [12]

    Evidence of rescattering effect in Pb–Pb collisions at the LHC through production of K∗(892)0 and φ (1020) mesons

    ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Evidence of rescattering effect in Pb–Pb collisions at the LHC through production of K∗(892)0 and φ (1020) mesons”, Phys. Lett. B 802 (2020) 135225, arXiv:1910.14419 [nucl-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  7. [13]

    K∗(892)0 and φ(1020) meson production at high transverse momentum in pp and Pb–Pb collisions at√sNN = 2.76 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, J. Adam et al., “K∗(892)0 and φ(1020) meson production at high transverse momentum in pp and Pb–Pb collisions at√sNN = 2.76 TeV”, Phys. Rev. C 95 (2017) 064606, arXiv:1702.00555 [nucl-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  8. [14]

    K∗(892)0 and φ(1020) production in Pb–Pb collisions at√sNN = 2.76 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, B. B. Abelev et al., “K∗(892)0 and φ(1020) production in Pb–Pb collisions at√sNN = 2.76 TeV”, Phys. Rev. C 91 (2015) 024609, arXiv:1404.0495 [nucl-ex]

    2015 arXiv

  9. [15]

    Suppression of Λ(1520) resonance production in central Pb–Pb collisions at√sNN = 2.76 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Suppression of Λ(1520) resonance production in central Pb–Pb collisions at√sNN = 2.76 TeV”, Phys. Rev. C 99 (2019) 024905, arXiv:1805.04361 [nucl-ex]

    2019 arXiv

  10. [16]

    K∗(892)± resonance production in Pb–Pb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “K∗(892)± resonance production in Pb–Pb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV”, Phys. Rev. C 109 (2024) 044902, arXiv:2308.16119v1 [nucl-ex]

    2024 arXiv

  11. [17]

    D. Sahu, S. Tripathy, G. S. Pradhan, and R. Sahoo, “Role of event multiplicity on hadronic phase lifetime and QCD phase boundary in ultrarelativistic collisions at energies available at the BNL Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider and CERN Large Hadron Collider”, Phys. Rev. C 101 (...

    2020

  12. [18]

    Production of K∗(892)0 and φ(1020) in p–Pb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, J. Adam et al., “Production of K∗(892)0 and φ(1020) in p–Pb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C76 (2016) 245, arXiv:1601.07868 [nucl-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  13. [19]

    Multiplicity dependence of K*(892)0 and φ(1020) production in pp collisions at√s = 13 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Multiplicity dependence of K*(892)0 and φ(1020) production in pp collisions at√s = 13 TeV”, Phys. Lett. B 807 (2020) 135501, arXiv:1910.14397 [nucl-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  14. [21]

    Production of light-flavor hadrons in pp collisions at√s = 7 and√s = 13 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Production of light-flavor hadrons in pp collisions at√s = 7 and√s = 13 TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C81 (2021) 256, arXiv:2005.11120 [nucl-ex]

    2021 arXiv

  15. [22]

    The ALICE experiment at the CERN LHC

    ALICE Collaboration, K. Aamodt et al., “The ALICE experiment at the CERN LHC”, JINST 3 (2008) S08002

    2008

  16. [23]

    Performance of the ALICE Experiment at the CERN LHC

    ALICE Collaboration, B. Abelev et al., “Performance of the ALICE Experiment at the CERN LHC”, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 29 (2014) 1430044, arXiv:1402.4476 [nucl-ex] . 16 Multiplicity dependence of K∗(892)± ALICE Collaboration

    2014 arXiv

  17. [24]

    The ALICE TPC, a large 3-dimensional tracking device with fast readout for ultra-high multiplicity events

    J. Alme et al., “The ALICE TPC, a large 3-dimensional tracking device with fast readout for ultra-high multiplicity events”, Nuclear Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Equipment 622 (2010) 316–367

    2010

  18. [25]

    Performance of the ALICE VZERO system

    ALICE Collaboration, E. Abbas et al., “Performance of the ALICE VZERO system”, JINST 8 (2013) P10016

    2013

  19. [26]

    Pseudorapidity and transverse-momentum distributions of charged particles in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, J. Adam et al., “Pseudorapidity and transverse-momentum distributions of charged particles in proton-proton collisions at√s = 13 TeV”, Phys. Lett. B 753 (2016) 319–329, arXiv:1509.08734 [nucl-ex]

    2016 arXiv

  20. [27]

    Review of Particle Physics

    Particle Data Group Collaboration, P. Zyla et al., “Review of Particle Physics”, Prog. Theor. Exp. Phys. 2020 (2020) 083C01

    2020

  21. [28]

    Acharya et al., The ALICE definition of primary particles

    ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., The ALICE definition of primary particles. ALICE-PUBLIC-2017-005. CERN, Geneva, 2017. https://cds.cern.ch/record/2270008

    2017

  22. [29]

    Multiplicity Dependence of Pion, Kaon, Proton and Lambda Production in p–Pb Collisions at√sNN= 5.02 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, B. Abelev et al., “Multiplicity Dependence of Pion, Kaon, Proton and Lambda Production in p–Pb Collisions at√sNN= 5.02 TeV”, Phys. Lett. B 728 (2014) 25–38, arXiv:1307.6796 [nucl-ex]

    2014 arXiv

  23. [30]

    Tuning PYTHIA 8.1: the Monash 2013 tune

    P. Skands et al., “Tuning PYTHIA 8.1: the Monash 2013 tune”, Eur. Phys. J. C74 (2014) 3024

    2014

  24. [31]

    Brun et al., GEANT: Detector Description and Simulation Tool; Oct 1994

    R. Brun et al., GEANT: Detector Description and Simulation Tool; Oct 1994. CERN Program Library. CERN, Geneva, 1993. Long Writeup W5013

    1994

  25. [33]

    Σ(1385)± resonance production in Pb–Pb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Σ(1385)± resonance production in Pb–Pb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C83 (2023) 351, arXiv:2205.13998 [nucl-ex]

    2023 arXiv

  26. [34]

    Color Reconnection and Flowlike Patterns in pp Collisions

    A. Ortiz Velasquez et al., “Color Reconnection and Flowlike Patterns in pp Collisions”, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 (Jul, 2013) 042001

    2013

  27. [35]

    Production of Σ(1385)± and Ξ(1530)0 in p–Pb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, D. Adamova et al., “Production of Σ(1385)± and Ξ(1530)0 in p–Pb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C77 (2017) 389, arXiv:1701.07797 [nucl-ex]

    2017 arXiv

  28. [36]

    Measurement of Λ(1520) production in pp collisions at√s = 7 TeV and p–Pb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV

    ALICE Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Measurement of Λ(1520) production in pp collisions at√s = 7 TeV and p–Pb collisions at√sNN = 5.02 TeV”, Eur. Phys. J. C80 (2020) 160, arXiv:1909.00486 [nucl-ex]

    2020 arXiv

  29. [37]

    Tuning Monte Carlo generators: the Perugia tunes

    P. Skands, “Tuning Monte Carlo generators: the Perugia tunes”, Phys. Rev. D 82 (2010) 074018

    2010

  30. [38]

    EPOS LHC: Test of collective hadronization with data measured at the CERN Large Hadron Collider

    T. Pierog et al., “EPOS LHC: Test of collective hadronization with data measured at the CERN Large Hadron Collider”, Phys. Rev. C 92 (2015) 034906

    2015

  31. [39]

    Inclusive and exclusive observables from dipoles in high energy collisions

    C. Flensburg et al., “Inclusive and exclusive observables from dipoles in high energy collisions”, J. High Energ. Phys. 2011 (2011) 103

    2011

  32. [40]

    Parton fragmentation and string dynamics

    B. Andersson et al., “Parton fragmentation and string dynamics”, Physics Reports 97 (1983) 31–145

    1983

  33. [41]

    Resonance suppression from color reconnection

    R. Acconcia et al., “Resonance suppression from color reconnection”, Phys. Rev. D 97 (2018) 036010, arXiv:1707.02075 [hep-ph] . 17 Multiplicity dependence of K∗(892)± ALICE Collaboration

    2018 arXiv

  34. [42]

    Parton-based Gribov–Regge theory

    H. Drescher et al., “Parton-based Gribov–Regge theory”, Physics Reports 350 (2001) 93–289

    2001

  35. [43]

    Small-x dipole evolution beyond the large-Nc limit

    E. Avsar, G. Gustafson, and L. Lonnblad, “Small-x dipole evolution beyond the large-Nc limit”, JHEP 01 (2007) 012, arXiv:hep-ph/0610157

    2007 arXiv

  36. [44]

    Effects of Overlapping Strings in pp Collisions

    C. Bierlich, G. Gustafson, L. Lönnblad, and A. Tarasov, “Effects of Overlapping Strings in pp Collisions”, JHEP 03 (2015) 148, arXiv:1412.6259 [hep-ph]

    2015 arXiv

  37. [45]

    The Pomeranchuk Singularity in Nonabelian Gauge Theories

    E. A. Kuraev, L. N. Lipatov, and V . S. Fadin, “The Pomeranchuk Singularity in Nonabelian Gauge Theories”, Sov. Phys. JETP 45 (1977) 199–204

    1977

  38. [46]

    The Pomeranchuk Singularity in Quantum Chromodynamics

    I. I. Balitsky and L. N. Lipatov, “The Pomeranchuk Singularity in Quantum Chromodynamics”, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 28 (1978) 822–829

    1978

  39. [47]

    On the Pomeranchuk singularity in asymptotically free theories

    E. Fadin, V .S. Kuraev and L. Lipatov, “On the Pomeranchuk singularity in asymptotically free theories”, Phys. Lett. B 60 (1975) 50–52

    1975

  40. [48]

    private communication

    T. Pierog and K. Werner, “private communication”, (2025) . 18 Multiplicity dependence of K∗(892)± ALICE Collaboration A The ALICE Collaboration I.J. Abualrob 113, S. Acharya 50, G. Aglieri Rinella 32, L. Aglietta 24, M. Agnello 29, N. Agrawal 25, Z. Ahammed 132, S. Ahmad 15, I...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.