1. Identified particle v 3 measurements at 200 GeV Au+Au collisions at RHIC-PHENIX experiment Sanshiro Mizuno for PHENIX Collaboration University of Tsukuba WPCF 2011 at Tokyo University 12011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF2011

2. 2 Outline Introduction and Motivation  Azimuthal anisotropy  Triangular anisotropy Analysis method  Data Set and PHENIX detector  Measuring method Results  Particle Identified v 3  Comparison with model calculation Summary and Outlook 2011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF2011

3. 3 Azimuthal anisotropy  Azimuthal anisotropy is sensitive to initial participant geometry, and provides the early information of generated matter in collisions.  Azimuthal correlation with the reaction plane. 2011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF2011

4. ridge shoulder 4 Triangular flow In the Glauber picture, participant deformation is caused by finite number of participants. Triangular flow is generated by initial participant deformation. Magnitude of (final state)v 3 is thought to be sensitive to  /s. Ridge and shoulder seem to be caused by v 3. almond shape triangular shape 2011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF2011

5. 5 charged particle anisotropy arXiv:1105.3928v1[nucl-ex] v 2 and v 3 centrality dependence is strong and weak, respectively. While results of v 2 can be described by Glauber model +  /s=0.08 CGC model +  /s=0.16 v 3 can only be described by Glauber model +  /s=0.08 p T [GeV/c ] vnvn 2011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF2011

6. 6 Partonic elliptic flow v 2 of , K, p as a function of p T have different behavior. This indicates hydrodynamics behavior. In low p T range, mass ordering is observed. v 2 as a function of KE T is scaled by the number of constituent quarks for KE T /n q < 1GeV. This indicates the existence of partonic flow in QGP. How about v 3 ? Is mass ordering observed? Does quark scaling work? 2011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF2011

7. 7 Data Set 200GeV Au+Au events obtained with the PHENIX detector during the 2007 running period. PHENIX detector Charged particle momentum & tracking Drift Chamber (DC) Pad Chamber(PC) Hadron particle identification Time of flight detector(TOF) Electromagnetic Calorimeter(EMCal) Reaction Plane Reaction Plane detector(RxN) Inner1.5<|  |<2.8 Outer1.0<|  |<1.5 2011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF2011  K p momentum×charge[GeV/c] mass 2 [(GeV/c 2 ) 2 ] |  |< 0.35

8. 2011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF20118 Measurement v n method v n = v n,true = v n,obs / Res(  n ) 1. Reaction Plane Calibration 1. Gain correction 2. Re-centering 3. Flattening 2. Reaction Plane Resolution Correlation with two Reaction Plane defined by different detector is used. RxN In 1.5<|  |<2.8 RxN Out 1.0<|  |<1.5 RxN In+Out 1.0<|  |<2.8 correlation centrality[%] p T [GeV/c] v n,true RxN In S RxN In N RxN In S+N RxN Out S RxN Out N RxN Out S+N RxN In+Out S RxN In+Out N RxN In+Out S+N v n,obs p T [GeV/c] resolution

9. 9 Result(PID v 3 ) PID v 3 has been measured. Mass ordering has been observed for v 3 in low p T. Baryon and mesons v 3 seems to be reversed at intermediate p T. 2011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF2011

10. 10 Result(quark scaling) The number of constituent quark scaling has been tested for v 3 for KE T /n q. n q scaling of v 3 is not as good as v 2. Some small deviation on the KE T /n q scaled v 3 appeared. 2011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF2011 [GeV]KE T /n q =

11. 2011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF201111 PID v 3 v 3 as a function of p T, KE T, p T /n q and KE T /n q have been measured. v 3 as a function of p T /n q seems to be scaled better than KE T /n q.

12. 12 Comparison with Model Calculation v3v3 p T [GeV/c] CGC model +  /s=0.16 Glauber model +  /s=0.08 Glauber model +  /s=0.08 works better. v3v3 p T [GeV/c] Burak Han Alver, arXiv:1007.5469[nucl-th] 5 - 10[%] 2011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF2011

13. 13 Summary Identified charged particle v 3 have been measured.  Mass ordering has been observed in low p T range.  Baryon/meson v 3 seems to be reversed at intermediate p T. The number of constituent quarks scaling has been tested.  v 3 of , K, p as a function of KE T /n q are not well scaled.  v 3 of , K, p as a function of p T /n q seems to be scaled better than KE T /n q. Comparison with model calculations  Glauber +  /s = 0.08 seems to be better Outlook Look at finer centrality and p T dependence.  Using full statistics study Higher order harmonics measurement 2011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF2011

14. 142011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF2011

15. 152011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF2011 PID v 2

16. 1. Gain correction w i = adc i / Q x,n =  w i cos(n  i ), Q y,n =  w i sin(n  i )  n = atan2(Q x,n, Q y,n ) / n 2. Re-centering Q’ x,n = (Q x,n - )/  Qx,n, Q’ y,n = (Q y,n - )/  Qy,n  ’ n = atan2(Q’ x,n, Q’ y,n ) / n 3. Flattening n  ” n = n  ’ n +  2/i{- cos(in  ’ n )+ sin(in  ’ n )} reaction plane detector(RxN) inner 1.5 < |  | < 2.8 outer 1.0 < |  | < 1.5 ii 16 Reaction Plane Calibration

17. 17 Method (v n measurement) v3 are measured using function. v n,true = v n,obs = v n,true = v n,obs / Res(  n,Reaction Plane ) v n,true : true v n v n,obs : observed v n  n,part : azimuthal angle of particle  n,Event Plane : azimuthal angle of Event Plane  n,Reaction Plane : azimuthal angle of Reaction Plane Res(  n,Reaction Plane ) : Resolution of  n,Reaction Plane 2011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF2011

18. 2011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF201118

19. 19 Result(KE T /(n q ) 3/2 ) 2011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF2011

20. 2011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF201120

21. 21 Result(identified v 3 using full statistics) 2011/9/23Sanshiro WPCF2011 Not Showing