Multipion Bose-Einstein correlations in<mml:math xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML"><mml:mrow><mml:mi>p</mml:mi><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:mrow><mml:mo>,</mml:mo><mml:mi>p</mml:mi></mml:math>-Pb, and Pb-Pb collisions at energies available at the CERN Large Hadron Collider
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Three- and four-pion Bose-Einstein correlations are presented in $pp,p$-Pb, and Pb-Pb collisions at the LHC. We compare our measured four-pion correlations to the expectation derived from two- and three-pion measurements. Such a comparison provides a method to search for coherent pion emission. We also present mixed-charge correlations in order to demonstrate the effectiveness of several analysis procedures such as Coulomb corrections. Same-charge four-pion correlations in $pp$ and $p$-Pb appear consistent with the expectations from three-pion measurements. However, the presence of non-negligible background correlations in both systems prevent a conclusive statement. In Pb-Pb collisions, we observe a significant suppression of three- and four-pion Bose-Einstein correlations compared to expectations from two-pion measurements. There appears to be no centrality dependence of the suppression within the 0%--50% centrality interval. The origin of the suppression is not clear. However, by postulating either coherent pion emission or large multibody Coulomb effects, the suppression may be explained.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.059 | 0.009 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; both teacher heads agree on what is shown here.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".