text:
# Double Beta Decay Constraints on Neutrino Masses and Mixing; Reanalysis with KamLAND Data

## I Introduction

The solar neutrino problem is finally solved by the KamLAND experiment KamLAND , which observed a clear deficit of about 40 % in $`\overline{\nu }_e`$ flux from reactors located in all over Japan. It pin-points the Large-Mixing-Angle (LMA) region as the unique solution of the solar neutrino problem based on the MSW matter enhanced neutrino flavor transformation MSW , excluding the remaining LOW and the vacuum (VAC) solutions. While the LMA solution was preferred over others on statistical ground in combined analyses of solar neutrino data solar  it is by no means true that it was selected out as the unique solution. It is because the values of $`\chi ^2`$ of the LOW and the VAC solutions, $``$ unity per degrees of freedomsolaranalysis , were acceptable and hence it was not possible with only solar neutrino data to uniquely idetify the LMA solution.

It implies, first of all, that the three-flavor mixing scheme of neutrinos had further support by the experiments, and the structure of lepton flavor mixing is established together with the existing evidences which come from the atmospheric SKatm  and the long-baseline accelerator experiments K2K . Given our above understanding of the KamLAND result it also means that the experiment gave the first direct proof of (almost) pure vacuum neutrino oscillation, the fascinating phenomenon first predicted by Maki, Nakagawa, and Sakata MNS , and first applied to the solar neutrino problem by Pontecorvo pontecorvo .

The resolution of the solar neutrino problem implies that we now know within certain uncertainties the values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$ and $`\mathrm{sin}^22\theta _{12}`$. It is an urgent task to uncover the all possible implications of the far more constrained values of these mixing parameters. We address in this paper the impact of the KamLAND result on masses and possible mass patterns of neutrinos.

We re-analyze the constraints on neutrino masses and mixing parameters imposed by neutrinoless double beta decay experiments in the light of the first results of KamLAND experiment under the assumption of Majorana neutrinos. See ref. vogel  for the present status of the double beta decay experiments. The constraints we will derive mina-hiro02  are the maximal ones that can be derived in a model-independent way (and assuming ignorance of the CP violating phases) in a general framework of three-flavor mixing scheme of neutrinos. It utilizes the bounds imposed by neutrinoless double beta decay search and the CHOOZ reactor experiment CHOOZ .

A natural question would be ”what is the impact of the KamLAND data on the double beta decay bound on neutrino mass and mixing parameters?”. The answer is that it allows us to derive, for the first time, an upper bound on the neutrino contribution to the cosmological $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ parameter, the energy density normalized by the critical density in the present universe. It is not because the parameter region for the LMA solution becomes narrower (in fact, the region for $`\theta _{12}`$ is virtually identical with that before KamLAND), but because the LOW and the VAC solutions which allow maximal or almost maximal mixing are eliminated by the KamLAND data at 99.95 % CL KamLAND .

## II Deriving the joint constraints by double beta decay and reactor experiments

In this section we review our formalism presented in mina-hiro02 . We use the following standard parametrization of the MNS matrix MNS :

$$U_{\text{MNS}}\left[\begin{array}{ccc}c_{12}c_{13}& s_{12}c_{13}& s_{13}e^{i\delta }\\ s_{12}c_{23}c_{12}s_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta }& c_{12}c_{23}s_{12}s_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta }& s_{23}c_{13}\\ s_{12}s_{23}c_{12}c_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta }& c_{12}s_{23}s_{12}c_{23}s_{13}e^{i\delta }& c_{23}c_{13}\end{array}\right].$$

The mixing matrix for three Majorana neutrinos is

$$UU_{\text{MNS}}\times \text{diag}(1,e^{i\beta },e^{i\gamma }),$$
(1)
where $`\beta `$ and $`\gamma `$ are extra CP-violating phases which are characteristic to Majorana particles Mphase . In this parametrization, the observable of double beta decay experiments is described as

$`m_{\beta \beta }`$ $``$ $`\left|{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{3}{}}}m_iU_{ei}^2\right|`$ (2)
$`=`$ $`\left|m_1c_{12}^2c_{13}^2+m_2s_{12}^2c_{13}^2e^{2i\beta }+m_3s_{13}^2e^{2i(\gamma \delta )}\right|,`$
where $`U_{ei}`$ denote the elements in the first row of $`U`$ and $`m_i`$ ($`i=1,2,3`$) are the neutrino mass eigenvalues. In the convention of this paper the normal hierarchy means $`m_1<m_2<m_3`$ and the inverted hierarchy $`m_3<m_1<m_2`$.

In order to utilize $`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{max}}`$ which is an experimental upper bound on $`m_{\beta \beta }`$, we derive a theoretical lower bound on $`m_{\beta \beta }`$. With appropriate choice of the phase-factor $`e^{2i(\gamma \delta )}`$ in eq. (2) it leads to the inequality

$`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{max}}m_{\beta \beta }c_{13}^2\left|m_1c_{12}^2+m_2s_{12}^2e^{2i\beta }\right|m_3s_{13}^2.`$ (3)
Strictly speaking, the right-hand-side (RHS) of (3) should be understood as the absolute value, but one can show that the alternative case does not lead to useful bound mina-hiro02 . The RHS of (3) is minimized by replacing $`e^{2i\beta }`$ with $`1`$ and $`s_{13}^2`$ with $`s_{\text{CH}}^2`$, respectively, where $`s_{\text{CH}}^2`$ is the largest value of $`s_{13}^2`$ which is allowed by the CHOOZ reactor experiment CHOOZ . Roughly speaking, $`s_{\text{CH}}^20.03`$. Thus, we obtain

$`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{max}}`$ $``$ $`c_{\text{CH}}^2\left|m_1c_{12}^2m_2s_{12}^2\right|m_3s_{\text{CH}}^2`$ (4)
$`=`$ $`c_{\text{CH}}^2\left|{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}(m_2+m_1)\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{12}{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}(m_2m_1)\right|m_3s_{\text{CH}}^2.`$
It is convenient to utilize $`\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{12}`$ as a parameter because it arises naturally in the degenerate mass case.

Next, we derive a theoretical upper bound on $`m_{\beta \beta }`$ to utilize an experimental lower bound $`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{min}}`$. Since the RHS of (2) is maximized by setting the phase-factors to the unity, we obtain

$`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{min}}\left(m_1c_{12}^2+m_2s_{12}^2\right)c_{13}^2+m_3s_{13}^2.`$ (5)
Furthermore, the RHS of (5) is maximized by replacing $`s_{13}^2`$ with $`s_{\text{CH}}^2`$, and zero for the normal and the inverted hierarchies, respectively. Then, we obtain

$`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{min}}`$ $``$ $`\left(m_1c_{12}^2+m_2s_{12}^2\right)c_{\text{CH}}^2+m_3s_{\text{CH}}^2`$ (6)
$`=`$ $`\left\{{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}(m_2+m_1){\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}(m_2m_1)\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{12}\right\}c_{\text{CH}}^2+m_3s_{\text{CH}}^2`$
for the normal hierarchy, and

$`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{min}}`$ $``$ $`m_1c_{12}^2+m_2s_{12}^2`$ (7)
$`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}(m_2+m_1){\displaystyle \frac{1}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}}(m_2m_1)\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{12}`$
for the inverted hierarchy.

The obtained bounds (4), (6), and (7) can be represented as allowed regions on $`m_l`$ \- $`\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{12}`$ plane, where $`m_l`$ denotes the lightest neutrino mass for each hierarchy. Notice that other mass eigenvalues are expressed by $`m_l`$ together with the solar and the atmospheric $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$’s;

$`m_3^2`$ $`=`$ $`m_1^2+\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2+\mathrm{\Delta }m_{23}^2,`$
$`m_2^2`$ $`=`$ $`m_1^2+\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2,`$ (8)
where $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{ij}^2m_j^2m_i^2`$.

Alternatively, one can use $`m_h`$, the highest neutrino mass ($`m_3`$ for the normal and $`m_2`$ for the inverted mass hierarchies) to make the similar plot, as done in mina-hiro02 . Whichever variable is used, they are observables in single beta decay experiments; modulo definitions of effective mass parameters mdef1 ; mdef2  it can be related, using (8), the observable in direct mass measurement in tritium beta decay experiments. For a review, see e.g., beta . We emphasize that importance of combining informations obtained by the single and the double beta decay experiments.

We do not present a careful treatment of the uncertainty of nuclear matrix elements in this letter, but a brief comment will be made on how it affects the mass bound to be obtained in the next section.

## III Analyzing the joint constraints by double beta decay and reactor experiments with presently available data

Let us first discuss the constraint based on the presently available experimental upper bound $`m_{\beta \beta }<0.35\text{eV}`$ (90 % CL) HeidelMoscow . In Fig. 1 we display the constraint imposed on mixing parameters on $`m_l`$ \- $`\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{12}`$ plane, where $`m_l`$ indicates the lowest mass, $`m_1`$ and $`m_3`$ for the normal and the inverted mass hierarchies, respectively. The region left to the curves is allowed by the inequality (4). The solid and the dashed lines are for the normal and the inverted mass hierarchies, respectively. One notices that the two curves completely overlap with each other at the present sensitivity of the experiment. The mass squared difference parameters are taken as $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\text{atm}}^2=2.5\times 10^3\text{eV}^2`$, the best fit value in the atmospheric neutrino analysis shiozawa , and $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2=7.3\times 10^5\text{eV}^2`$, the best fit value of the combined analysis of the KamLAND and all the solar neutrino data KL-solar .

Also shown in Fig. 1 as the shaded strip is the region allowed by joint analysis of the KamLAND and all the solar neutrino data KL-solar . From Fig. 1 one can draw the upper bound on $`m_l`$ as $`m_l2.13(4.26)`$ eV, where the number in parenthesis here and in eq. (9) indicates the one for the case where a factor of 2 uncertainty of nuclear matrix elements is taken into account. We notice that if either the LOW or the VAC solution were the solution to the solar neutrino problem the allowed region of $`\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{12}`$ would extend to zero (maximal mixing) and hence there would be no upper bound on $`m_l`$.

This bound can be translated into the neutrino contribution to the cosmological $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ parameter Kolb

$`\mathrm{\Omega }_\nu ={\displaystyle \frac{_im_i}{91.5\text{eV}}}h^20.070(0.14)h^2`$ (9)
which is already very restrictive. Here, $`h`$ denotes the Hubble parameter in units of $`100\text{km/s Mpc}`$. For possible future use, we provide in Fig. 2 the upper limit of $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\nu `$ as a function of $`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{max}}`$ for three values of $`\mathrm{tan}^2\theta _{12}`$, $`\mathrm{tan}^2\theta _{12}=0.46,0.33`$, and 0.67. These values are chosen as the best fit, the upper and the lower limit of 90 % CL allowed region of the LMA solution by combined analysis of KamLAND and all the solar neutrino data KL-solar . It is notable that even the double beta bound $`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{max}}0.1`$ eV which may be reachable in several years is powerful enough to constrain $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\nu `$ parameter to be less than $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\nu 1h^2`$ %.

We notice that a short (almost) straight line, which is the lower bound on $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\nu h^2`$, appears at around the lower end in Fig. 2a. It is due to the fact that a vertical band appears in allowed region in $`m_l`$ \- $`m_{\beta \beta }`$ plane at low $`m_{\beta \beta }`$, the feature first observed in mbbmin . The behavior of the curve at around the lower end in Fig. 2b for the case of inverted mass hierarchy is slightly different from that obtained in barger's .

We mention here that a similar constraint on neutrino masses may be obtained by cosmological observation cosmology .

The constraints imposed on neutrino mixing parameters by neutrinoless double beta decay have been discussed by many authors. In a previous paper mina-hiro02  we tried to classify them into the ones in the ”early epoch” early , the ”modern era” dblbeta1 , and the ”post-modern era” dblbeta2  which now include some additional references.

## IV Analyzing the joint constraints by double beta decay and reactor experiments with possible future data

In this section, we analyze the constrains based on the double beta decay bound which would be obtained in the future. We consider two sample cases.

Case 1: $`0.1\text{eV}m_{\beta \beta }0.3\text{eV}`$

Case 2: $`0.01\text{eV}m_{\beta \beta }0.03\text{eV}`$.

Case 1 is a typical mass region proved and to be proved by the ongoing experiments HeidelMoscow ; IGEX ; NEMO , while Case 2 is a typical one for the next-generation experiments. The latter include, in alphabetical order, CUORE, EXO, GENIUS, Majorana, MOON, and XMASS CUORE ; EXO ; GENIUS ; Majorana ; MOON ; XMASS . The mass square difference parameters are fixed as in the previous section.

### IV.1 Case 1 : $`0.1\text{eV}m_{\beta \beta }0.3\text{eV}`$

The bounds for this case are presented in Fig. 4. One notices that the lower bound on $`m_{\beta \beta }`$, (6) and (7), gives an almost vertical line at $`m_lm_{\beta \beta }^{\text{min}}`$ because of the small values of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2`$. Therefore, $`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{min}}`$ is approximately regarded as the lower bound on $`m_l`$. In Case 2 with an order of magnitude smaller value of $`m_{\beta \beta }`$ the situation is quite different, as you see in the next subsection.

On the other hand, the upper bound on $`m_{\beta \beta }`$ gives a nontrivial constraint, as shown in Fig. 4. The curve for (4) approaches to the asymptote $`\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{12}=\pm t_{\text{CH}}^2`$ at large $`m_l`$, where $`t_{\text{CH}}=s_{\text{CH}}/c_{\text{CH}}`$. Hence, if either the LOW or the VAC solution were the case, there would be no upper bound on $`m_l`$. In the LMA solution the upper bound does exist for the current allowed region of $`\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{12}`$.

Notice that the bounds (4) for the normal and the inverted hierarchies are very similar to each other. It means that the degenerate mass approximation holds to a good accuracy. In this approximation, the constraint (4) becomes

$$m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{max}}m\left(c_{\text{CH}}^2\left|\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{12}\right|s_{\text{CH}}^2\right).$$
(10)
where $`m_im`$.

We now understand that in the degenerate mass regime $`m_l/m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{max}}`$ is a good parameter. In Fig. 4, the bounds (4) are presented on the $`m_l/m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{max}}`$ \- $`\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{12}`$ plane for $`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{max}}=0.1\text{eV}`$. Two curves for the normal and the inverted mass hierarchies overlap well, indicating goodness of the degenerate mass approximation. Once we know that the scaling works, the result presented in Fig. 4 applies to any values of $`m_l`$ and $`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{max}}`$ as far as the degenerate mass approximation holds.

### IV.2 Case 2 : $`0.01\text{eV}m_{\beta \beta }0.03\text{eV}`$

The bounds for this case are presented in Fig. 5. It is clear that the degenerate mass approximation is no longer good because the relevant energy scale is smaller than the atmospheric mass scale $`\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\text{atm}}^2}0.05\text{eV}`$.111Although we put aside the uncertainties of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$’s for simplicity, those affect particularly the values related to the lower bound on $`m_l`$ in such a small mass scale. Therefore, the values in (11), (12), and the left-hand-side of (14) are just for reference. The bounds for the normal and the inverted hierarchy significantly differ with each other.

An important point in Fig. 5 is that with such improved sensitivities experiments may start distinguishing the two different mass hierarchies. Most notably, the difference between the normal and the inverted mass hierarchies is quite visible at $`m_l<0.05`$ eV, and the lower limit of $`m_l`$ disappears for the inverted hierarchy. It occurs because the constraint (7) is satisfied even for $`m_l=0`$. A similar things occurs also in the normal hierarchy if $`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{min}}`$ is sufficiently small. One can easily estimate, by taking $`m_l=0`$ and $`\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{12}=0`$ in (6) and (7), the critical value of $`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{min}}`$ under which the lower bound on $`m_l`$ disappears. Approximately, they read

$$\frac{1}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}c_{\text{CH}}^2\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2}+s_{\text{CH}}^2\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\text{atm}}^2}0.0056\text{eV}\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2}$$
(11)
for the normal hierarchy, and

$$\frac{1}{\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}2}}c_{\text{CH}}^2\left(\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\text{atm}}^2\mathrm{\Delta }m_{12}^2}+\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\text{atm}}^2}\right)0.048\text{eV}\sqrt{\mathrm{\Delta }m_{\text{atm}}^2}$$
(12)
for the inverted hierarchy. In Case 2, $`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{min}}=0.01\text{eV}`$ is smaller than 0.048 eV, and that is why there is no lower bound on $`m_l`$ for the inverted hierarchy in Fig. 5.

Finally, let us extract the bound on $`m_l`$ from the result of evidence  by assuming that it will be confirmed by NEMO3. Since $`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{max}}=0.84\text{eV}`$ is large enough, we can use Fig. 4. Therefore, the upper bound on $`m_l`$ is extracted as

$`m_l3[6]\times m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{max}}=2.5[5.0]\text{eV}`$ (13)
for the LMA best fit parameters and for the most conservative case in square parenthesis, respectively. On the other hand, $`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{min}}=0.05\text{eV}`$ determines the lower bound on $`m_l`$. By combining those results, we obtain

$`0.05\text{eV}(0.005\text{eV})m_l2.5[5.0]\text{eV}`$ (14)
for the normal (inverted) hierarchy with, in right-hand-side, the LMA best fit parameters and for the most conservative case in square parenthesis. Therefore, we see that all the active neutrinos is massive if the result of evidence  is confirmed. This conclusion, however, may not survive if the uncertainties of $`\mathrm{\Delta }m^2`$’s and nuclear matrix elements are taken into account.

## V Summary

In the light of the KamLAND data we reanalyzed the constraint on neutrino masses and mixing imposed by neutrinoless double beta decay search and the CHOOZ reactor experiment. We have shown that by now the absolute mass scale for neutrinos is bounded from above by the “conspiracy” of KamLAND and double beta decay experiments. This conclusion and our whole analysis in this paper are valid under the assumption that neutrinos are Majorana particles.

In closer detail, allowed regions on a plane spanned by the lowest neutrino mass versus the solar mixing angle $`\theta _{12}`$ were obtained by using $`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{max}}`$ ($`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{min}}`$), the experimental upper (lower) bound obtained and to be obtained in the ongoing and the future double beta decay experiments. For given $`\theta _{12}`$, these become constraints on neutrino mass, the lightest mass $`m_l`$ (or the heaviest one though we did not give them explicitly). Roughly speaking, $`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{min}}m_l3[6]\times m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{max}}`$ for the LMA best fit parameters and for the most conservative case in square parenthesis, respectively.

It was made clear that the condition $`|\mathrm{cos}2\theta _{12}|>t_{\text{CH}}^20.03`$ was necessary for the upper bound on $`m_l`$ to exist. On the other hand, the condition $`m_{\beta \beta }^{\text{min}}0.0056\text{eV}(0.048\text{eV})`$ needs to be satisfied for the normal (inverted) mass hierarchy, for the lower bound on $`m_l`$ to exist. For example, $`0.05\text{eV}m_{\beta \beta }0.84\text{eV}`$ gives $`0.05\text{eV}(0.005\text{eV})m_l2.5[5.0]\text{eV}`$ for the normal (inverted) hierarchy.

Note added:

While this paper was in the revision process, we became aware of the report by the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) WMAP  in which a severe constraint on omega parameter $`\mathrm{\Omega }_\nu h^2<0.0076`$ (95 % CL) is placed. It means that double beta decay searches must have the sensitivity in the region $`m_{\beta \beta }<0.1\text{eV}`$ to be competitive, as one can see from Fig. 2.

###### Acknowledgements.

HM thank Theoretical Physics Department of Fermilab for hospitality where this work was completed. This work was supported by the Grant-in-Aid for Scientific Research in Priority Areas No. 12047222, Japan Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology.


format: text

text:
# Non-identical particle correlation analysis as a probe of transverse flow

## 1 Transverse expansion in ultra-relativistic heavy ion collisions

High energy densities are reached in ultra-relativistic heavy ion collisions , which may lead to a transition from hadronic matter to partonic matter. In order to assess the formation of a partonic state of matter, which requires forming a large volume of interacting matter, it is mandatory to show evidences that the particles emerging from the system exhibit collective behavior. While it is not a required condition, showing that the system reaches thermal equilibrium would provide such clue. Models that assume chemical equilibrium at hadronization describe very well the relative abundance of most particle species . However, such models are also successful at describing yields in $`pp`$ and $`e^+e^{}`$ collisions where thermalization is not achieved. Another clue, may be obtained from studying collective expansion of the system which must arise if particles interact with one another. Indeed, a pressure gradient would then build up due to the large initial energy density gradient found between the core and the edge of the system. Conclusive evidence of the system’s collective expansion have been gathered from several independent analysis: elliptic flow, transverse mass spectra and two-particle correlations . These measurements in Au–Au collisions at $`\sqrt{s_{NN}}=130`$ GeV are consistently interpreted in the blast wave framework relying on transverse flow, i.e. collective expansion in the transverse plane. The blast wave parameterization is described in Ref . Dealing with central events, cylindrical symmetry is assumed, and the calculations parameters are: temperature ($`T=110`$ MeV), transverse flow rapidity ($`\rho (r)=3/2\rho (r/R)`$ with $`\rho =0.6`$), radius of the system ($`R=13`$ fm), and emission duration ($`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau =1.5`$ fm/c) . $`T`$ and $`\rho `$ are extracted from pion, kaon and proton transverse mass spectra. $`R`$ and $`\mathrm{\Delta }\tau `$ are extracted from the pion source radii, $`R_{out}`$ and $`R_{side}`$.

The interpretation of data in terms of transverse flow may not be unique. For example, the increase of the mean transverse momentum with particle mass could be explained by initial state scattering . Since spatial separation between sources of different species can be extracted from non-identical particle correlation functions, they provide an independent cross-check of the transverse flow prescription. Indeed, in the blast wave framework, the competition between thermal motion and transverse flow leads to a significantly different emission pattern depending on the particle transverse mass. When thermal motion dominates, i.e. for low transverse momentum pions, the emission points of particles going in a specific direction are spread over a large fraction of the source. On the other hand, this correlation is strong for particles with larger transverse mass, and their emission points are more likely to be shifted along the particle momentum, towards the edge of the system. Thus, transverse flow implies that the average transverse radii where particles are emitted rise with their transverse mass. Pions are emitted the closest to the center of the system, then kaons, then protons. This ordering may be different in hadronic cascade models where hadronic crosss sections matter.

## 2 Non-identical particle correlation functions at STAR

The correlation between non-identical particles arises from Coulomb and nuclear interactions. It depends on $`\stackrel{}{k}^{}`$ the relative momentum and $`\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }r}^{}`$ the relative separation in the pair rest frame. The correlation is strong, when $`|\stackrel{}{k}^{}|=k^{}`$ and $`|\stackrel{}{\mathrm{\Delta }r}^{}|`$ are small111We note that small $`k^{}`$ implies that particles have the same velocity and not the same momentum.. In Ref.  it was noticed that if the space-time emission points of two different particle species do not coincide, the correlation strength due to the Coulomb interaction, and in some cases due to the nuclear interaction, depends on whether both particles move towards each other (stronger correlation) or away from each other (weaker correlation). To differentiate both cases we calculate $`k_{out}^{}`$, the projection of $`\stackrel{}{k}^{}`$ along the pair transverse momentum. By convention, we calculate $`k_{out}^{}`$ for the lighter particle. Thus, $`k_{out}^{}>0`$ ($`k_{out}^{}<0`$) means that the lighter particle transverse velocity is larger (smaller) than the heavier one’s. Thus, if, as predicted in the blast wave framework pions are emitted closer to the center of the source than kaons, the pion-kaon correlation will be stronger when $`k_{out}^{}>0`$ than when $`k_{out}^{}<0`$, since in the first case pions tend to catch up with kaons while in the second case they tend to move away from kaons.

Non-identical particle correlations are studied by constructing correlation functions : $`C_2(x)=A(x)/B(x)`$ where $`x=k^{}sign(k_{out}^{})`$, $`A`$ denotes the distribution for pairs of particles from the same event, and $`B`$ the distribution for pairs of particle from different events. Pions, kaons and protons are reconstructed and identified using the STAR Time Projection Chamber, in Au-Au collisions at $`\sqrt{s_{NN}}=130`$ GeV and $`\sqrt{s_{NN}}=200`$ GeV. Central events accounting for 12% of the total cross section are selected. Clean pion, kaon and proton samples are selected using their specific energy loss ($`dE/dx`$). This selection limits the acceptance of pions to $`0.08<p_t<0.6`$ GeV/c, of kaons to $`0.4<p_t<0.8`$ GeV/c and of protons to $`0.6<p_t<1.1`$ GeV/c. In addition, only particles in the rapidity window $`|Y|<0.5`$ are selected. Contamination from misidentified and secondary particles is corrected for since it reduces the correlation strength which is to first order equivalent to increasing the source size.

$`\pi K`$, $`\pi p`$ and $`Kp`$ correlation functions are shown in figure 1. A clear asymmetry between $`k_{out}^{}>0`$ and $`k_{out}^{}<0`$ can be seen in the $`\pi K`$ and $`\pi p`$ correlation functions while the $`Kp`$ correlation functions are symmetric within statistical errors. This indicates that pions are emitted at a different average space-time point than kaons and protons. To extract quantitative estimates of the source size and asymmetry, a fit is performed. Correlation functions are calculated following the method described in Ref . The calculation is performed on reconstructed pairs in order to match the experimental acceptance. Positions are assigned to particles forming these pairs from a three dimensional Gaussian distribution, representing the particle separation in the pair rest frame. The free parameters are $`\mathrm{\Delta }r_{out}^{}`$ ($`r_{out}^{}(\pi )r_{out}^{}(K)`$ , $`r_{out}^{}(\pi )r_{out}^{}(p)`$, or $`r_{out}^{}(K)r_{out}^{}(p)`$ ) , the mean of the Gaussian in the direction parallel to the pair transverse momentum and $`\sigma `$ the width of the Gaussian that is set to the same value in all 3 dimensions. The parameters that best fit simultaneously the four correlation functions constructed for each kind of pairs are summarized in table 1. $`\beta _t`$ is the average pair transverse velocity at low $`k^{}`$. The corresponding calculated correlation functions are shown in figure 1.

## 3 Non-identical particle correlations and transverse flow

Figure 2 shows a comparison of the data with predictions from the blast wave parameterization and the hadronic cascade model, RQMD. In the blast wave parameterization, flow introduces the ordering $`r_{out}^{}(\pi )r_{out}^{}(K)<0`$, $`r_{out}^{}(\pi )r_{out}^{}(p)<0`$ and $`r_{out}^{}(K)r_{out}^{}(p)<0`$, which agrees well with the data within error. The magnitudes of $`r_{out}^{}(\pi )r_{out}^{}(K)`$ and $`r_{out}^{}(\pi )r_{out}^{}(p)`$ are also well reproduced, which is remarkable since no parameters were tuned to reproduce this data. It is especially interesting to notice that no additional differences between the emission time of pions, protons and kaons are needed to explain the data. RQMD reproduces the three different shifts between pion, kaon and proton sources. It has also been found to agree with the asymmetry between pion and protons sources measured in Pb-Pb collisions at $`\sqrt{s_{NN}}=`$ 17.3 GeV . In RQMD, flow builds up through hadronic rescattering, which yield to the same ordering found with the blast wave parameterization. In addition, resonance feed-down and differences in hadronic cross sections between pions, kaons and protons, introduce a time ordering in the emission of pions, kaons and protons. On average, kaons are emitted first, then pions, and then protons. Since $`\mathrm{\Delta }r_{out}^{}=(\mathrm{\Delta }r_{out}\beta _tc\mathrm{\Delta }t)/\sqrt{1\beta _t^2}`$, spatial shift and time shift add up in the $`\pi K`$ case while they compete against each other in the $`\pi p`$ and $`Kp`$ cases. However, for all three pair types, the spatial shift due to transverse flow is larger than the time shift. For example, protons are emitted on average latter than pions due to the very large feed down from $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ resonances, but this delay is counterbalanced by a larger spatial shift from flow, which is driven by the very large pion-proton cross section, i.e. the $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$ resonances.

$`\pi K`$, $`\pi p`$ and $`Kp`$ correlation functions have been constructed by the STAR experiment. They show that pions, kaons and protons are not emitted at the same average space-time position. The shifts between the pion, kaon and proton sources are consistent with the spatial shift induced by transverse flow as parameterized in the blast wave framework. RQMD also reproduces the shifts primarily due to transverse flow. Thus, these new results support the picture of a system in collective transverse expansion.


text:
# Observations of giant outbursts from Cygnus X-1

## 1 Introduction

The X-ray source Cygnus X-1 was discovered by Bowyer et al (1965), and its optical counterpart, a spectroscopic binary at a distance of $``$ 2 kpc with a 5.6 day period (HDE226868), was identified by Webster and Murdin (1972) and Bolton (1972). The primary is a supergiant, and the mass of the secondary is at least $`7\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{}}`$ (Gies & Bolton 1986), making it a black hole candidate and a high mass X-ray binary. The X-ray source, which has been observed from keV to MeV energies, is thought to be powered by accretion (e.g. Petterson 1978). Soft X-radiation may be produced in an accretion disk close to the black hole, and hard X-rays by inverse Compton scattering in a separate hot plasma; see Liang and Nolan (1984) for a review. Recently, a relativistic jet has been detected in the radio (Stirling et al. 2001), and Romero et al. (2002) have suggested that Cygnus X-1 is a microblazar, that is, that we are observing it close to the axis of the jet.

Cygnus X-1 is known to exhibit two states of X-ray emission, which are thought to depend on the accretion rate (Esin et al. 1998). The first, more common one, is the hard state, in which the 20 - 200 keV flux is roughly one Crab, and the $`<`$10 keV emission is about 0.5 Crab. The second is the soft state, in which the low energy X-ray flux increases by a factor of 2 - 4, while the high energy flux decreases by a factor of about 2. Transitions between the two states and flaring have been documented extensively (Ling et al. 1997; Zhang et al. 1997; Cui et al. 2002; McConnell et al. 2002), and both states exhibit variability of a factor of two or so on all timescales.

In this paper we report on seven episodes of long, intense gamma-ray emission from this source; we refer to them as outbursts (and identify them by their dates), to distinguish them from the shorter, less intense flaring which has been documented previously. One of these outbursts, 950325, was found by Mazets et al. (1995) and initially thought to be a gamma-ray burst; subsequently, however, its source was found to be Cygnus X-1 by M. Briggs (private communication, 1995). Later, Stern et al. (2001) called attention to five outbursts on 1999 April 19-21. During the two brightest events, the hard X-ray flux increased by over an order of magnitude for $``$ 1000 s. Observations by Ulysses and Konus - Wind of still three more outbursts in 2002 - 2003 have prompted us to reanalyze all the available data in order to obtain better energy spectra and a more precise source location as well.

## 2 Observations

The outbursts reported here were discovered in the time history data of the gamma-ray burst (GRB) detectors aboard the Wind, Ulysses, and Compton Gamma-Ray Observatory (CGRO) spacecraft (Konus, GRB, and the Burst and Transient Source Experiment, or BATSE, experiments respectively). In general, the data used were for the non-triggered modes, with low temporal and spectral resolution (0.25 - 2.9 s and 3 channels, respectively). Although in some cases, the emission was intense enough to trigger BATSE, the data obtained in the triggered modes had too small a duration to cover the entire outburst, and the lower time resolution continuous data have been used for most of our analysis. Table 1 gives the dates, times, and durations of the seven events, as well as the spacecraft which observed them, and the spectral state and orbital phase of Cyg X-1. To determine the source of the outbursts, we have employed the usual method of interplanetary network (IPN) triangulation for a repeating source (e.g. Hurley et al. 1999). In all cases, the IPN consisted of only two widely separated spacecraft (Ulysses and either CGRO or Wind ), so a single annulus of location was obtained for each flare. The seven annuli were combined statistically to produce the 1, 2, and 3 $`\sigma `$ error ellipses shown in figure 1. The only known hard X-ray source in this region is Cyg X-1, which lies at the $``$ 95 % confidence level.

Although Ulysses observed all seven of the outbursts in Table 1, it was in a mode in which no energy spectra were accumulated. Konus Wind observed 6 of the 7 outbursts (one outburst, 990421B, occurred during a period when the data were contaminated by solar particles), and we have used the data from it exclusively for time-resolved spectral analysis. The time and energy resolutions vary depending on the mode of operation. For five outbursts we have data in three energy channels (nominally 10-50, 50-200, and 200-750 keV, or G1, G2, and G3, respectively) which span the entire event. In the sixth case (950325) a cosmic gamma-ray burst fortuitously triggered Konus during the outburst, allowing it to record multi-channel energy spectra for a total of 360 s, starting 120 s after the GRB trigger, when the 15 s long GRB had ceased emitting. In addition, for this event, there are also 3 channel data. Because the most detailed data are available for it, we discuss this outburst first.

The 950325 outburst is presented in detail in figure 2. In the top three panels, the time histories in the G1, G2, and G3 windows are shown, and in the bottom panels, the hardness ratios G2/G1 and G3/G2. The letters A-D indicate the intervals where energy spectra have been analyzed. (The results of this and other analyses are summarized in table 2.) In particular, B marks the 360 s interval where multi-channel spectra were accumulated. The gap following B is the interval where the data were transferred to the onboard tape recorder. The hardness ratios display a weak but obvious spectral variability. From them, it is reasonable to assume that the multi-channel energy spectra measured in interval B, during the fading stage of the flare, also characterize the spectrum of the preceding, intense phase. The multi-channel spectrum is presented in figure 3 in $`\nu \mathrm{F}_\nu `$ units. (The spectral deconvolution procedure has been described by Terekhov et al. 1998). The solid line gives the best fit spectrum, $`\mathrm{E}^2\mathrm{A}(\mathrm{E}/1\mathrm{k}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V})^\alpha \mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{E}/\mathrm{E}_0)\mathrm{keV}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$, with $`\mathrm{A}=0.88\pm 0.23\mathrm{photons}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{keV}^1,\mathrm{the}\mathrm{photon}\mathrm{index}\alpha =1.24\pm 0.15,\mathrm{and}\mathrm{E}_0=112\pm 30\mathrm{keV},\mathrm{and}\mathrm{with}\chi ^2=22.6`$ for 18 degrees of freedom. This spectral shape is consistent with that of the Cyg X-1 hard state.

The 15 - 300 keV time histories of the other outbursts are presented in figures 4 - 9. The vertical dotted lines and letters at the top of the Konus plots indicate the intervals over which 3 channel energy spectra were accumulated to improve statistics. Fits were done with the function $`\mathrm{A}(\mathrm{E}/1\mathrm{k}\mathrm{e}\mathrm{V})^\alpha \mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{E}/\mathrm{E}_0)\mathrm{photons}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1\mathrm{keV}^1`$, and the fitting parameters are given in table 2. Ep, the peak energy, was obtained from the spectrum expressed in $`\nu \mathrm{F}_\nu `$ units. The fluences and peak fluxes, given in table 3, were calculated assuming no spectral evolution over the intervals considered.

It should be noted that an omnidirectional sensor detects an outburst from a source as a temporary increase in the count rate over an average background level. Clearly in this case that level includes any persistent flux from Cyg X-1. Thus the total flux during an outburst will be the sum of the persistent and flaring fluxes detected by Konus. However, the value of the persistent flux from Cyg X-1 at time intervals adjacent to the outburst is poorly known. Accordingly the fluences and peak fluxes in table 3 are only to be considered estimates of the outburst component.

## 3 Discussion

Long-term observations of Cyg X-1 in X-rays and soft gamma-rays from HEAO 3 (Ling et al. 1987), BATSE (Ling et al. 1997), Mir-Kvant (Borkus et al. 1995), and BeppoSAX (Frontera et al. 2001) have shown that the source spends most of the time in the hard state. According to BATSE data for 1991 - 1999 (McConnell et al. 2002), the hard flux in the 20 - 100 keV energy range varied between 0.2 and 0.36 photons cm-2 s-1, roughly the average value corresponding to the $`\gamma _2`$ level in the 45 - 140 keV band identified by Ling et al. (1987). In 1999 April, several outbursts lasting up to 1000 s were found in the BATSE data (Stern et al. 2001). The peak fluxes in the 50 - 300 keV range, 0.3 - 1.1 photons cm-2 s-1, were significantly higher than the average value of $`0.1\mathrm{photons}\mathrm{cm}^2\mathrm{s}^1`$. Transitions to the soft state lasting for several months were observed only a few times. According to the data of the All Sky Monitor aboard the Rossi X-ray Timing Explorer (RXTE/ASM, McConnell et al. 2002), the soft X-ray (2 - 10 keV) count rates increase from $`20\mathrm{to}80\mathrm{counts}\mathrm{s}^1`$ after transitions to the soft state. From the BATSE and RXTE light curves we have ascertained that outbursts 950110, 950325, 990421A and B, and 030212 occured while Cyg X-1 was in the hard state whereas outbursts 020224 and 020331 arose from the soft state.

Broadband spectral observations of Cyg X-1 from numerous spacecraft and combinations of spacecraft have been used to study comprehensively the spectral shapes at various times in order to deduce the emission mechanism and the geometry of the regions emitting and reprocessing radiation (Mir-Kvant: Borkus et al. 1995; CGRO: Ling et al. 1997; Ginga and CGRO: Gierlinski et al. 1997; RXTE: Dove et al. 1998; ASCA, RXTE, and CGRO: Gierlinski et al. 1999; BeppoSAX: Frontera et al. 2001; and CGRO and BeppoSAX: McConnell et al. 2002). The accuracy of our data is insufficient for such a thorough analysis of source models. Rather, we have focused on obtaining the essential information on a new feature of Cyg X-1 activity from limited observational data using the simplest model spectra, namely a power law, $`\mathrm{AE}^\alpha `$, or a power law with an exponential cutoff, $`\mathrm{AE}^\alpha \mathrm{exp}(\mathrm{E}/\mathrm{E}_0)`$. Apart from the lack of high resolution spectral data, the most serious difficulties in our data processing are connected with slow changes in the background level, especially in the low energy ranges. Background count rates in the G1 window and, to a lesser extent, in G2, are strongly affected by the activity of cosmic X-ray sources and vary, even when the Sun is quiet, by $`\pm 1\%`$, averaged over hours and days. For this reason, for example, we do not attempt spectral fits for the long, weak onsets of outbursts 950110 and 950325.

The intense stage of each outburst was subdivided into several time intervals in some concordance with the temporal behaviour of the hardness ratio, as shown in figures 2 and 4-9. Spectral parameters for all of these intervals were determined using the following procedure. The counts accumulated in energy band Gi (i=1, 2, 3) can be represented as an integral over an energy loss spectrum

$$N_{G_i}=_{G_i}\left[𝐌𝐟(A,E_0,\alpha )\right](E)dE$$

using a model photon spectral function $`𝐟`$ and the detector response matrix $`𝐌`$. The resulting system of three equations with unknowns A, $`\alpha `$, and E0 was solved by the Marquardt-Levenberg method and the uncertainties in the parameters were calculated from the covariance matrix. In the case of the exponentially attenuated power law, parameters $`\alpha `$ and E0 are strongly correlated. The peak energy Ep for a $`\nu F_\nu `$ spectrum is a more robust characteristic. Estimates of the errors in the spectral parameters were checked by numerical simulations, i.e. by introducing Poisonnian-distributed deviations to the count rates G1, G2, and G3, applying the procedure described above, and analyzing the distributions of the spectral parameters. The results of the simulations are in very good agreement with estimates from the covariance matrix.

All of these data are collected in table 2, which includes an additional interval B\* for 950325. This interval, where G1, G2, and G3 data were available, partially overlaps interval B. From this it is evident that the parameters obtained by both methods agree well to within their uncertainties. The 15 - 300 keV fluences and peak fluxes for all the outbursts are presented in table 3.

The main conclusions which can be drawn from these data are the following.

* An exponential cutoff is essential when fitting outbursts arising from the hard state. The parameters $`\alpha `$ and E0 for these outbursts are consistent with the values for the hard state of Cyg X-1 reported in literature.
* The spectra of the 2002 soft state outbursts are softer in our energy range. The photon spectra of 020331 are well fit by a single slope power law with $`\alpha 2.6`$, which is certainly softer than any spectrum observed in the hard state. The spectra of 020224 have an intermediate shape and display a low E0 with large uncertainties in $`\alpha `$.
* The hardness ratio G2/G1 varies slightly during outbursts, but it does not display any clear correlation with the luminosity. The only exception is observed in the outburst of 990421B, where the hardness decreases substantially at the peak (see Stern, Beloborodov, & Poutanen 2001)
* In general, it seems that giant outbursts maintain the spectral parameters, and hence emission mechanism, of the current underlying spectral state of Cyg X-1, even though the 15 - 300 keV peak fluxes are up to ten times higher than the persistent emission fluxes. The corresponding fraction of the peak luminosity in these outbursts approaches one tenth of the Eddington luminosity for an object with $`\mathrm{M}/\mathrm{M}_{\mathrm{}}10`$.

The soft and hard states of Cygnus X-1 and other galactic black hole candidates have comparable bolometric luminosities, but different energy spectra (e.g. Ling et al. 1997; Zdziarski et al. 2002). The hard X-ray spectra of these sources are typically characterized by power law with exponential cutoff with photon index $`\alpha 1.6`$ and cutoff energy $`E_0150`$ keV (Phlips et al. 1996, Gierlinski et al. 1997, Dove et al. 1998), which are consistent with those in table 2 for the first four outbursts and the seventh one. Many authors have interpreted them as thermal Comptonization with optical depth $`\tau _T1`$ and electron temperature $`50100`$ keV (for recent studies see Maccarone & Coppi, 2002).

The model for transitions between the soft and hard states discussed in a number of recent works is based on the idea of accretion disk transformations. In the soft state the accretion proceeds via a standard optically thick accretion disk (Shakura & Sunyaev, 1973) emitting a blackbody soft X-ray peak and a nonthermal tail resulting from coronal activity in the disk. In the hard state the inner part of the disk is thought to form a hot geometrically thick corona (see e.g. Barrio, Done & Nayakshin, 2002, Poutanen, Krolik & Ryde, 1997, and references therein) with a moderate ($`\tau _T1`$) optical depth. The outer region of the disk, beyond a few tens to one hundred gravitational radii, still remains optically thick, emitting a cooler (0.1 - 0.2 keV) and weaker blackbody component. The physical grounds for such a transformation could be a transition of the inner part of the disk into a regime balancing between ADAF and standard disk modes (Esin et al. 1998). However such a regime requires a fine tuning which would clearly be violated during giant outbursts (Stern, Beloborodov & Poutanen, 2001).

An alternative to disk accretion for the case of the hard state could be accretion of the companion wind with a near-critical angular momentum (Illarionov & Sunyaev, 1975). Then, instead of a standard optically thick disk, a small-scale disk with $`\tau _T1`$ can appear. This scenario can naturally describe the hard state spectrum (Beloborodov & Illarionov, 2001) in terms of thermal Comptonization in the small disk within a few gravitational radii. No difficulties with the large observed variabilities arise in this model.

The absence of a clear correlation between luminosity and hardness is noteworthy. Actually, the presence of a luminosity-hardness correlation or anti-correlation depends on many details, including the geometry of the emission region, the soft radiation, and pair production. If the Comptonizing plasma is pair-dominated, then the temperature is a weak function of the luminosity: pair production provides a thermostatic effect (see, e.g. Malzac, Beloborodov, & Poutanen, 2001). The spectrum in this case is softer at higher luminosities (if the geometry is fixed), but the dependence is weak (Stern et al. 1995). A luminosity-hardness anti-correlation is expected, but we do not observe it because of statistics.

What triggers the giant outbursts? The normal time variability of Cygnus X-1 has a broad power density spectrum which probably arises from instabilities in the disk. The outbursts do not appear to display the same variability pattern; moreover, they show similar temporal behaviors in the hard and soft states, which correspond to different states of the disk. Therefore, they are unlikely to originate due to an intrinsic disk effect. The most straightforward suggestion, and the one which we adopt as a working hypothesis, is that this could be some rare eruptive phenomenon in the donor wind ejection. The typical dynamical timescale for standard disk accretion in the case of Cyg X-1 is much longer than the duration of the outbursts, so that any fluctuations in the donor ejection rate would be dilated by up to a day or more (Bisnovaty-Kogan, private communication, 2002). Direct wind accretion, on the other hand, has a dynamical timescale $`1000`$ s, but a shorter timescale can arise from instabilities in the accreting flow (Illarionov, private communication, 2002).

Other interpretations are possible. For example, the outbursts could be attributed to the recently discovered jet of Cyg X-1 (Stirling et al. 2001) and their recurrence could be explained by its precession (Romero et al. 2002).

## 4 Conclusion

The outbursts reported here have durations comparable to the period of a low Earth-orbiting spacecraft, making them difficult to detect and follow from experiments aboard such spacecraft, but relatively easy for experiments which are far from Earth and do not undergo occultation and orbital background variations. Indeed, our observations of 990421A show that it continues well beyond the point at which it was Earth-occulted to BATSE, and our observations of 990421B indicate that it commenced several hundred seconds before it rose on BATSE (Stern et al. 2001). These observations point to a new use for the IPN, namely tracking long, intense flares from Galactic transients. The data from a single experiment which has little or no directional and/or spectral information are easily confused with solar X-ray and particle events, which explains why it has taken so long to determine the origin of some of the outbursts presented here. However, confirmation by a second spacecraft solves this problem and gives an annulus of position which in many cases may be sufficient to determine the origin of the emission. For several outbursts, the BATSE observations alone yield source directions which are only accurate to 17$`\mathrm{°}`$ , leaving the possibility that the source could have been Cygnus X-3. However, relatively small error ellipses may be obtained from multiple observations, and our localizations rule this possibility out conclusively.

The histories of Cygnus X-1 and GRBs have been curiously intertwined over the decades. In the early days of X-ray astronomy, the use of interplanetary spacecraft was suggested to localize sources with rapid time variations such as Cyg X-1 (Giacconi 1972). Although, to our knowledge, such measurements were never carried out on persistent X-ray sources, today the technique is the basis of the IPN, and the present observations demonstrate the feasibility of this suggestion. Later, Mason et al. (1997) pointed out that bursts from Cyg X-1 could appear in the BATSE database; BATSE has indeed triggered many times on this source. Some of the long outbursts presented here have time histories which, if compressed in time, would be virtually impossible to distinguish from those of GRBs, and their spectra are hard. These similarities suggest that accretion onto a black hole, which is believed to power both Cyg X-1 and GRBs albeit under very different circumstances, may manifest itself in similar ways in very different settings.

## 5 Acknowledgments

Support for the Ulysses GRB experiment is provided by JPL Contract 958056, and for Konus-Wind by a Russian Aviation and Space Agency contract and RFBR grant N 03-02-17517. We are grateful to Al Levine and the ASM/RXTE team for quick-look results on Cygnus X-1, and to Andrei Illarionov for useful discussions. This research has made use of the SIMBAD database, operated at CDS, Strasbourg, France.


text:
# Results on Identified Charged Hadrons from the PHENIX Experiment at RHIC

## 1 Introduction and Experimental Setup

The physics motivation of the ultra-relativistic heavy-ion program at the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) is to study nuclear matter at extremely high temperature and energy density with the hope to reach a new form of matter called the quark gluon plasma (QGP). Among the various probes of the QGP state, hadrons carry important information about the collision dynamics along with the spatial and temporal evolution of the system from the early stage of the collisions to the final state interactions.

For studies of hadron physics at RHIC, the PHENIX experiment  demonstrates good capability for particle identification (PID) for both charged hadrons ($`\pi ^\pm `$, $`K^\pm `$, $`p`$, $`\overline{p}`$, $`d`$ and $`\overline{d}`$) and neutral pions over a broad momentum range. The charged hadrons can be identified with time-of-flight measurements in two different detectors: (1) a high resolution Time-of-Flight wall (TOF) and, (2) an electro-magnetic calorimeter (EMC), in conjunction with the tracking system in the PHENIX central arm spectrometers and the beam counter, which provides the start timing and the event vertex determination. The tracking system in the central arm consists of drift chambers (DC), three layers of pad chambers (PC), and time expansion chambers (TEC). The PHENIX central arms cover $`|\eta |<0.35`$ in pseudo-rapidity, and cover $`\pi /4`$ with the TOF and $`3\pi /4`$ by EMC in azimuth. The $`\pi /K`$ and $`K/p`$ separation can be achieved up to 2 and 4 GeV/$`c`$ in $`p_T`$, respectively, using the TOF detector, which has a 120 ps timing resolution. Neutral pions are identified with the EMC via the $`\pi ^0\gamma \gamma `$ decay channel up to 10 GeV/$`c`$ in $`p_T`$ using the full statistics taken during Run II at RHIC in Au+Au collisions .

## 2 Experimental Results

We have measured the transverse momentum distributions for $`\pi ^\pm `$, $`K^\pm `$, $`p`$ and $`\overline{p}`$ at mid-rapidity in Au+Au collisions at $`\sqrt{s_{NN}}`$ = 200 GeV over a broad momentum range over various centrality selections. To identify the charged particles, the high resolution TOF counter is used in this analysis. We use about 4 million minimum bias events. The data are classified into 11 centrality bins expressed in percent of the total inelastic cross section. The spectra for each particle species are corrected for geometrical acceptance, decay in flight, multiple scattering, and tracking efficiency using a single particle Monte Carlo simulation. A multiplicity-dependent track reconstruction efficiency is also determined and applied by embedding simulated tracks into real events.

The upper two panels in Figure 1 show the $`p_T`$ distributions for identified hadrons in the most central events (0–5%) in 200 GeV Au+Au collisions for positive (left) and negative (right) particles. The lower two panels show the most peripheral events (60–91.4%). In each panel, the data are presented up to 1.8 GeV/$`c`$ for charged pions and kaons, and 3.8 GeV/$`c`$ for $`p`$ and $`\overline{p}`$. In the low $`p_T`$ region of the most central events, the data indicate that the inverse slope increases with the particle mass. Also, the shape of the $`p`$ and $`\overline{p}`$ spectra have a shoulder-arm shape while the pion spectra have a concave shape. On the other hand, in the most peripheral events, the spectra are almost parallel to each other. This mass dependence of the slopes and shapes of the spectra for protons in the central events can be explained by a radial flow picture. At around 2.0 GeV/$`c`$ in central events, the proton yield becomes comparable to the pion yield. A similar behavior is also seen for negatively charged particles.

In order to quantify the observed mass dependence of the slopes, the mean transverse momenta $`p_T`$ are extracted for 11 centrality selections and for each particle species. The $`p_T`$ spectra are extrapolated to below and above the measured range using a power law function for pions, an $`m_T`$ exponential function for kaons, and a Boltzmann function for $`p`$ and $`\overline{p}`$. In Figure 2, the centrality dependence of $`p_T`$ for identified charged hadrons are shown together with the 130 GeV data points . In both the 200 GeV and 130 GeV data, $`p_T`$ for all particle species increases from the most peripheral to the most central events and also increases with particle mass. The dependence of $`p_T`$ on particle mass suggests the existence of a collective hydrodynamical expansion. The dependence on the number of participant nucleons ($`N_{part}`$) calculated using a Glauber model  may be due to an increasing radial expansion from peripheral to central events.

Particle composition at high $`p_T`$ is also interesting in order to understand baryon production and transport, system evolution, and the interplay between soft processes and jet quenching in hard processes. In Figure 3, the $`p/\pi `$ and $`\overline{p}/\pi `$ ratios are shown. For the denominator of the ratio $`p/\pi `$ and $`\overline{p}/\pi `$, we use two independent measurements with different subsystems: (1) $`p_T`$ spectra for $`\pi ^\pm `$ up to 2 GeV/$`c`$ identified using the TOF, (2) neutral pions results from 1 GeV/$`c`$ to 3.8 GeV/$`c`$ measured using the EMC. Both the $`p/\pi `$ and $`\overline{p}/\pi `$ ratios have a clear centrality dependence. The data shows that these ratios in central collisions reach unity at a $`p_T`$ of 2$``$3 GeV/$`c`$, while they saturate at around $`p_T`$ of 0.3 – 0.4 in peripheral collisions. This observed behavior in central events may be attributed to the composition of two effects including a larger flow effect for protons (and $`\overline{p}`$) compared to pions, and a pion suppression effect at high $`p_T`$ .

## 3 Summary

We present results on identified hadrons in Au+Au collisions at $`\sqrt{s_{NN}}`$ = 200 GeV at mid-rapidity over different centrality selections from the PHENIX experiment. The transverse momentum distributions for $`\pi ^\pm `$, $`K^\pm `$, $`p`$, $`\overline{p}`$, $`d`$, and $`\overline{d}`$ are measured and we observe a mass dependence of the slopes and shapes of the identified charged spectra in central events. However, they are almost parallel to each other in the most peripheral events. Also, the mean transverse momentum for all particle species increases from peripheral to central events, and with particle mass. The ratios $`p/\pi `$ and $`\overline{p}/\pi `$ up to 3.8 GeV/$`c`$ are also measured by using the combined results for charged and neutral pions. In central collisions, the ratio reaches unity at a $`p_T`$ of 2$``$ 3 GeV/$`c`$ and saturates at a $`p_T`$ around 0.3 – 0.4 GeV/$`c`$ in peripheral collisions.


text:
# Cosmic Shear with Next Generation Redshift Surveys as a Cosmological Probe

## I Introduction

We now have strong evidence that the expansion of the universe is accelerating, from the original method of Type Ia supernova distance-redshift measurements perl99 ; riess98  and concordant observations of the cosmic microwave background (CMB) power spectrum and of large scale structure bond ; perc . Understanding the nature of the dark energy responsible for the acceleration will have profound implications for cosmology, high energy physics, and fundamental physics. Mapping the expansion history of the universe offers a way to gain insights into the dark energy and the fate of the universe, for example by characterizing the equation of state behavior which is directly related to properties of the scalar field potential.

Distance measures, notably the supernova method, have proved useful at constraining the energy density and equation of state of the dark energy, with great improvements expected in the next decade. But these involve an integration over the expansion rate behavior $`H(z)`$, which itself involves a redshift integral over the equation of state $`w(z)`$. We can ask whether we can devise a more direct probe of the acceleration. In fact one such, the redshift drift test, was proposed by Sandage san61  in 1961 and developed further by Linder lin97 .

The redshift of a source is a central astrophysical observable. It is directly related to the change in time intervals due to the cosmic expansion between a photon’s emission and observation, $`z=dt_o/dt_e1=a_o/a_e1`$, where $`a(t)`$ is the scale factor of the universe. But obviously one could consider a second derivative term, a time dependence of the redshift itself as the universe ages:

$`{\displaystyle \frac{dz}{dt_o}}`$ $`=`$ $`{\displaystyle \frac{d}{dt_o}}\left[{\displaystyle \frac{a(t_o)}{a(t_e)}}\right]=[\dot{a}(t_o)\dot{a}(t_e)]/a(t_e)`$ (1)
$`=`$ $`H_0(1+z)H(z).`$ (2)
This provides a direct measure of acceleration, being effectively a second time derivative, as can be seen from the low redshift limit: $`\mathrm{\Delta }z/zq_0H_0\mathrm{\Delta }t`$, where $`q_0`$ is the present deceleration parameter. However since the astronomical observing time is much smaller than the Hubble time, $`\mathrm{\Delta }tH_0^1`$, this is not a practical probe. For example in the most optimistic case of observing over a period of 10 years a hypothetical spectral line emitted at the CMB last scattering surface at $`z=10^3`$, one requires a redshift measurement of a part in $`10^5`$ to distinguish cosmological models. For emission line objects at $`z=5`$, this becomes a part in $`10^8`$.

Moreover, just as peculiar velocities affect redshift measurements at the level of $`v/c`$, so do peculiar accelerations, i.e. local gravitational potentials $`\mathrm{\Phi }`$ from inhomogeneously distributed matter, affect the redshift drift measurements at a level $`\mathrm{\Phi }/c^210^5`$. This latter effect even ruins the generalization of the redshift drift called the cosmic pulsar test, where timing is improved by measuring a large number $`N`$ of wavelengths or pulses lin97 .

But if we are stymied in measuring the acceleration directly, at least we can hope to measure the first derivative of the expansion, $`H(z)`$. One of the ways to do this is the cosmic shear, or Alcock-Paczyński test. Section II sets up the formalism while Section III applies Fisher matrix analysis to investigate the theoretical sensitivity of this method for estimating the cosmological parameters. In Section IV we introduce observational sanity in the form of systematic uncertainties and discuss the proposed KAOS project as a means of carrying out this test. We summarize our conclusions and plans for future work in Section V.

## II Cosmic Shear Test

Proper distances measured along the line of sight carry information through light emitted at different times in the expansion history of the universe. Therefore in a sphere of comoving points, differences in the emission times lead to probing the geometry at different expansion rates. So observationally a sphere will appear to be distorted, or sheared, with the magnitude of the effect sensitive to the expansion rate. This is the cosmic shear effect discussed by Alcock & Paczyński (ap ; do not confuse this with shear from weak gravitational lensing – due to inhomogeneities rather than the global structure of spacetime).

In more detail, if we consider the small difference in radial distance between nearby emitters, then we localize the behavior in redshift and essentially measure the expansion rate at that time. However transverse to the radial direction the angular separation between comoving points is measured at a constant value of the scale factor $`a(t_e)`$, and then the light from each source propagates over the same intervening distance to the observer at $`t_o`$. Thus in the radial case the data gives a snapshot of the expansion rate while the transverse distance contains an integration over the expansion history from emission to observation.

Consider a sphere of comoving points. The distance through the center of the sphere along the line of sight is the proper distance,

$$dr_{}=dt=a(t)dr_c=(1+z)^1H^1(z)\mathrm{\Delta }z.$$
(3)
The transverse distance is

$$dr_{}=r_a(z)\mathrm{\Delta }\theta =(1+z)^1r_c(z)\mathrm{\Delta }\theta ,$$
(4)
where $`z=a^11`$ is the redshift, $`H=\dot{a}/a`$ is the Hubble parameter, $`r_c`$ the comoving distance, and $`r_a`$ the angular distance (see, for example, lin97 ).

From the observables of the angular scale $`\mathrm{\Delta }\theta `$ of such comoving sources, their central redshift $`z`$, and their redshift extent $`\mathrm{\Delta }z`$, one can form a quantity

$$D(z)\mathrm{\Delta }z/\mathrm{\Delta }\theta =H(z)_0^z𝑑z^{}/H(z^{}).$$
(5)
The cosmic shear is then

$$S=\sqrt{2\left[1\left(\frac{\mathrm{\Delta }z}{\mathrm{\Delta }\theta }\right)^2\right]}.$$
(6)
This has some excellent properties for a cosmological probe. In particular, it has dependence on $`H(z)`$ directly, not just through an integral. Since $`H`$ is related to the energy density of the universe then one can try to map the density history and equation of state. Indeed for time varying equation of state of the dark energy $`w(z)`$, $`H`$ depends on an integral of $`w(z)`$, so distance measures involve $`w(z)`$ as a double integral. Therefore one might hope that the Alcock-Paczyński differential distance test might be more sensitive to reconstructing the dark energy equation of state than a standard distance test.

Another interesting characteristic of (5) is that it does not depend on any absolute scale, since $`H`$ appears in both numerator and denominator. So there is no absolute measurement to marginalize over.

The physics of the test seems clean, using pure geometry of the background spacetime, so long as we can find sources that are comoving and defining a known local spatial geometry. Conventionally the local source geometry is taken to be spherical, as it would be for an isotropic arrangement. Possibilities for defining isotropically arranged sources include large coherent objects such as superclusters in the linear density regime and so following the isotropic expansion of the universe, or lengths defined through correlation functions between individual objects, such as for galaxies or Lyman alpha forest absorbers. The extent to which these assumptions break down or cannot be corrected yield systematic errors to plague the method. As for many other cosmological probes, the systematic errors turn out to be more severe than statistical errors from insufficient data. Section IV discusses this further.

## III Sensitivity to Cosmological Parameters

We begin by considering a purely theoretical analysis of the capabilities of the test, leaving observational realities for §IV. A good way to understand the sensitivities and degeneracies of cosmological probes is through Fisher matrix analysis of the dependence of the observable on the parameters. We take a flat universe defined by three parameters: the dimensionless matter density $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ (so the dark energy density is $`1\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$), the value of the dark energy equation of state today $`w_0`$, and a measure of its time variation $`w^{}`$. Since we want to consider observations extending to redshifts greater than unity, e.g. Lyman alpha observations are most plentiful with $`z3`$, we adopt the equation of state parametrization $`w(z)=w_0+w_az/(1+z)`$ with the definition $`w^{}=dw/d\mathrm{ln}(1+z)|_{z=1}=w_a/2`$ linwa . This approximates well the behavior of several classes of dark energy models, especially those with a slow roll phase, is well behaved even for $`z>1`$, and allows insight into the effects of the physically expected time variation in the equation of state.

The distance distortion $`D(z)=H(z)𝑑z/H`$ differs in its behavior in an interesting way from distance or volume measures: the two factors actually depend on the cosmological parameters in opposite ways because they have reciprocal dependence on the expansion rate. At low redshift the direct $`H(z)`$ dependence dominates since all distances must be similar. But at high redshifts the universe was matter dominated and so $`H(z1)`$ is insensitive to the equation of state parameters and the distance factor takes over, since it retains memory of those parameters due to its integral nature.

Figures 1 and 2 show the dependence of the Hubble parameter and the distances $`r_c`$ and $`r_a`$, respectively, on the cosmological parameters $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ and $`w_0`$ ($`w_a`$ behaves similarly). One clearly sees that the dependencies are in inverse relation. This implies that there can be crossover ranges in redshift where the distance distortion $`D`$ is essentially independent of one of the parameters. While this makes it impossible to determine that aspect of cosmology with observations in that redshift range, it has a benefit as well. From the figures one can deduce that degeneracies exist where one parameter can be adjusted to counteract the effect of another. But at the crossover points one parameter will not affect the distortion and so the degeneracy can be broken. Essentially, observations near a crossover apply to a reduced phase space, and hence the other parameter estimates will be sharper. This is clearly seen in later figures.

An excellent way to explore the sensitivity of an observational test to the cosmology is through Fisher matrix analysis tegfis . This methodology approximates the likelihood surface of the parameter fit to observations with a gaussian probability near the best fit, the fiducial model. The sensitivity of its estimation of parameter values depends on the derivatives of the observational quantity with respect to the parameter, $`D/x`$, and the precision with which the observations can be made. Writing the errors as $`\delta D=(\delta D/D)D`$, we see that for a given fractional measurement precision $`\sigma _D\delta D/D`$ we can obtain a parameter error estimate $`\delta x`$ by investigating $`\mathrm{ln}D/x`$. Figure 3 shows this central quantity of Fisher analysis.

Indeed we can read off almost all of our results from this sensitivity graph. The previously discussed crossovers are clear, with the probe aloof to $`w_0`$ around $`z1.3`$ and to $`w^{}`$ (i.e. $`w_a`$) around $`z2.3`$. Sensitivity to $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ grows out to $`z1`$, after which it levels off; $`w_0`$ has a sweet spot at $`z0.4`$ and again above $`z2`$; the time variation $`w^{}`$ has a broad, though low, impact from $`z0.61.1`$. However at $`z1.3`$ we expect $`w^{}`$ to be uncorrelated with $`w_0`$ and so possibly easier to determine.

Also note that while at low redshift the sensitivities to $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ and $`w_0`$ enter with the same sign, this changes after the $`w_0`$ crossover. This means that at low redshift the error ellipse in the $`w_0\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ plane will have the same orientation as for the supernova distance case: making $`w_0`$ larger (less negative) can be counteracted by making $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ smaller, defining a degeneracy direction in that plane. However higher redshift cosmic shear observations will have an orthogonal degeneracy direction, holding out the promise of complementarity with supernovae. A similar rotation of error ellipse contours with redshift can be predicted between $`w_0`$ and $`w^{}`$.

Figure 3 for the Fisher sensitivity even allows us to calculate lower limits on the precision with which we can estimate the parameters:

$$\delta x>(\mathrm{ln}D/x)^1\sigma _D.$$
(7)
This lower limit refers to fixing all parameters but one, and so will underestimate the true error due to degeneracies. If we take, say, 1% precision in observations, then the lower limits on estimating $`\{\mathrm{\Omega }_m,w_0,w^{}\}`$ are 0.015, 0.1, 0.15 for the peaks of the sensitivity curves. However multiple observations can improve on the precision, while systematic errors will put a floor on it. To proceed further quantitatively we must input an observational suite into the Fisher method.

To best illustrate the results we begin with a simple set of observations. We assume equal numbers $`n`$ of observations in redshift bins of width 0.1, each with the same precision $`\sigma _D`$, and vary the redshift range the observations cover. Initially we apply only statistical errors and so only the combination $`\sigma _D/\sqrt{n}`$ matters.

Purely to test our intuition from the Fisher sensitivity figure, we take the highly idealized situation of constant $`w(z)`$ (i.e. fix $`w^{}=0`$ a priori) in Figure 4 and fixed $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ in Figure 5, as well as unrealistically good precision. The rotation of the contours with redshift is clear. Note that for the crossover redshift $`z1.3`$ the determination of $`w_0`$ is uncorrelated with the other parameters, i.e. the contours are vertical or horizontal.

## IV Systematic Uncertainties and Observational Methods

Virtually all proposed observational methods for probing cosmology run into limits imposed by systematic uncertainties rather than statistical errors. So although the cosmic shear test appears rather promising in its sensitivity to parameters and complementarity with other probes, as expected from its inclusion of a bare factor $`H(z)`$ as discussed in the first two sections, it behooves us not to make estimates of its power merely by speculating on achievable future survey statistics. For more realistic assessment of the promise of this method for determination of cosmological parameters, we must investigate the effect of systematics. Detailed characterization of irreducible uncertainities requires a comprehensive survey design and analysis; instead we present here a simple model that should illustrate the main effects and give reasonably realistic quantitative results.

We adopt a precision of 2% in measurement, with $`n=10`$ observations per 0.1 redshift bin, but also include an irreducible systematics floor of 2% in a bin. This makes the actual numbers used for the statistical error moot, except when we later consider a systematic that declines at low redshifts. Generally we adopt a gaussian prior on the matter density of 0.03, but also investigated 0.01. The plots show results for observations over redshift ranges, e.g. $`z=12`$.

Figure 6 shows the $`w\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ plane, disallowing the possibility of any time variation in the equation of state – an a priori assumption without justification. Note that systematics have a large effect on the Alcock-Paczyński test. In particular they wipe out most of the complementarity at high redshift with the supernova method that was given by the $`w`$ sensitivity crossover and resulting rotation of the error ellipse. (Note that the contours for the next generation supernova survey, SNAP, include systematics.) Some complementarity is retained for observations at $`z>2`$, allowing an improvement in determining $`w`$ and $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ by a factor two. Of course modeling the dark energy as a constant equation of state becomes even more suspect as one increases the range of observation.

When one removes the constraint that the equation of state must be constant a priori, the Alcock-Paczyński test does not offer any improvement to SNAP in estimation of the present value of the equation of state $`w_0`$, as seen in Figure 7. The combination of the two experiments does help to limit $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$, but so does, for example, the weak gravitational lensing survey that is an integral part of the SNAP mission.

In the $`w^{}w`$ plane (recall $`w^{}w_a/2`$), Figure 8 illustrates that not fixing $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ has a drastic effect on the error contours in comparison to the thin ellipses of Figure 5. Uncertainty in $`\mathrm{\Omega }_m`$ broadens the contours in a more or less fixed direction in this plane, though, so it affects the ellipses for some redshift ranges less than others. For example data around $`z0.7`$ does not suffer as much loss of sensitivity to the equation of state parameters. Indeed observations covering the range of $`z=01`$ at 2% precision permit determination of the time variation of the equation of state with errors about 30% looser than from SNAP. Unfortunately the respective error regions mostly overlap, with little complementarity. Still, they would provide independent checks of the results using very different methods.

In a bid to optimize the parameter determination we can examine how best to concentrate the observations, and over what redshift range. Given a systematics floor, an increase in the numbers of observations within a bin or an improvement in the statistical precision accomplishes little. An exception to this would be if external systematics needed to be reduced, for example by dividing the data into subsets for a “like to like” comparison. As for the redshift range, the results found here indicate that relatively little leverage is gained, for the given prior and systematics, outside the range $`z0.20.9`$.

This is well suited for ground based observations by large telescopes within a decade. Such a cosmic shear survey could be carried out by the KAOS project: the Kilo-Aperture Optical Spectrometer proposed as a front end for the 8 meter Gemini South telescope. This would have multiplexing capability from some 4000 apertures to measure detailed velocity maps of supercluster environments. In such a linear overdensity region one might hope to apply the Alcock-Paczyński test without any complications of nonlinear gravitational physics or gas dynamics. Another possibility is studying the anisotropy of correlation functions of subclasses of bright galaxies. Both approaches can cover the preferred redshift range and statistics would not be a problem with a 1.5 square degree field of view and coverage of some 400 square degrees of sky to measure precise redshifts for $`10^6`$ galaxies.

Observations at $`z>1`$ were shown to be fairly insensitive to the dark energy equation of state for the cosmic shear test, and thus can be used robustly to learn about astrophysics, perhaps from Lyman alpha forest observations. Of course the rich panoply of data from such a next generation survey as KAOS can be examined with other cosmological probes as well (with similar cautions and care for the influence of systematic uncertainties).

## V Conclusion

The cosmic shear test looks extremely promising theoretically for the determination of cosmological parameters. This is evident from its tomographic dependence on the expansion rate of the universe, shown by the appearance of the Hubble parameter $`H(z)`$ by itself. It has further interesting properties in the redshift evolution of its parameter degeneracies and complementarity with other probes.

However, systematic uncertainties, most probably involving peculiar velocities and distortions related to the local environment rather than cosmic expansion, put severe limits on the probe’s ability to fulfill its potential.

Unless systematic uncertainties can be brought under the 2% level, the cosmic shear test applied at low or high redshift does not appear to offer significantly complementary or generally comparable limits to the supernova distance method. Considering a linear systematic of $`0.02z`$, a matter density prior $`\sigma (\mathrm{\Omega }_m)=0.01`$, or the addition of Planck CMB data does not greatly affect these conclusions.

The best hope for applying this method does, however, lie at redshifts $`z<1`$, which is observationally feasible. Therefore careful study of the systematic uncertainties might yield some regime in which the next generation of wide, deep redshift surveys can bring this method of determining cosmological parameters to fruition.

## Acknowledgments

I thank Matthew Colless and Dragan Huterer for useful discussions. I acknowledge support for this work from the Director, Office of Science, DOE under DE-AC03-76SF00098 at LBL and by the NSF under PHY99-07949 at the KITP.