2005
DOI: 10.1103/physrevlett.94.171802
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Measurement of Charged-Particle Multiplicities in Gluon and Quark Jets inpp¯Collisions ats=1.8   TeV

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

3
11
0

Year Published

2009
2009
2017
2017

Publication Types

Select...
5
1

Relationship

0
6

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 18 publications
(14 citation statements)
references
References 28 publications
3
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…1); 2) the power α is constant as a function of N part (already observed in Ref. [13]); 3) c F is consistent with the value calculated and measured in the vacuum which is ≈ 1.8 at the jet hardness Q = 100 GeV [24,25]. This represents a precise effective quantification of the jet quenching in √ s NN = 2.76 TeV Pb+Pb data.…”
Section: Single Jet Suppressionsupporting
confidence: 86%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…1); 2) the power α is constant as a function of N part (already observed in Ref. [13]); 3) c F is consistent with the value calculated and measured in the vacuum which is ≈ 1.8 at the jet hardness Q = 100 GeV [24,25]. This represents a precise effective quantification of the jet quenching in √ s NN = 2.76 TeV Pb+Pb data.…”
Section: Single Jet Suppressionsupporting
confidence: 86%
“…This has been done by minimizing the difference between the EQ model and measured jet R AA [7] in different rapidity intervals and centrality bins. This procedure follows the logic of extracting this factor in the vacuum [25,26].…”
Section: Single Jet Suppressionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The value c F = 1.78 ± 0.12 was obtained. This value is consistent with the value calculated and measured in the vacuum which is ≈ 1.8 at the jet hardness Q = 100 GeV [19,20].…”
Section: Quantifying the Role Of The Flavorsupporting
confidence: 92%
“…The data are taken from Refs. [21,22,[25][26][27][28][29][30] and references therein, covering essentially all available measurements. One can see that the data do not agree very well at small scales, an issue that will be discussed elsewhere [16].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…[7] as due to the absence of the singlet ''minus'' component governed byT res À ð0; Q 2 ; Q 2 0 Þ in Eqs. (29) and (30). This component is included here for the first time.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%