Non-thermal distributions of charm and charmonium in relativistic heavy-ion collisions
Abstract
We employ the Boltzmann transport model to study the charmonium regeneration with non-thermal charm quarks in relativistic heavy-ion collisions. As heavy quarks do not reach kinetic thermalization in the quark-gluon plasma (QGP), the final transverse momentum distribution of regenerated charmonium depends on the degree of charm quark kinetic thermalization. When the charm momentum distribution becomes harder, more charm quarks are distributed in the middle and high , where the production of regenerated charmonium also becomes larger. With non-thermal momentum distribution of charm quarks in their coalescence process, the nuclear modification factor of charmonium enhances at middle . Besides, the elliptic flow of charmonium also enhances at middle as more regenerated charmonium are distributed in this region. The theoretical calculations with non-thermal charm distribution explain well the dependence of charmonium and , which indicates that charm quarks do not reach complete kinetic thermalization in the QGP when charmonium are regenerated.
I introduction
In relativistic heavy-ion collisions, it is believed that an extremely hot and deconfined medium made up of quarks and gluons, called “Quark-Gluon Plasma” (QGP) is produced Bazavov:2011nk . The study of signals Matsui:1986dk ; Stoecker:2004qu and properties Ding:2015ona of this new deconfined matter, such as transport coefficients and initial energy densities helps to comprehend the strong interaction at finite temperatures. Heavy quarks and quarkonium are predominantly produced in the nuclear parton hard scatterings due to their large masses. They have been proposed as clean probes of early stage of the hot medium generated in nucleus-nucleus (AA) collisions in the Large Hadron Collider (LHC) and the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider (RHIC) Zhao:2020jqu ; Zhao:2011cv ; He:2012df ; Yan:2006ve ; Liu:2010ej ; Chen:2019qzx . In this hot medium, the heavy quark potential is screened by thermal light partons Wen:2022utn ; Wen:2022yjx , which results in the “melt” of quarkonium-bound states when the medium temperature is sufficiently high Karsch:2005nk ; Satz:2005hx . The highest temperature at which quarkonium-bound states can survive is called the “dissociation temperature” Liu:2012zw ; Guo:2012hx ; Chen:2013wmr . Below this , inelastic collisions from thermal light partons can also dissociate the quarkonium-bound states Adil:2006ra ; Wong:2001td ; Zhu:2004nw . The survival probability of quarkonium decreases when traveling through the QGP due to both color screening and parton inelastic scatterings. The hot medium effects are characterized by the nuclear modification factor , which is defined as the ratio of quarkonium production in AA collisions to the production in proton-proton (pp) collisions scaled by the number of nucleon binary collisions .
At the LHC, where there are many heavy quarks in the QGP, charm and anti-charm quarks have a significant chance to combine into new bound states when they move to areas with lower temperatures. This process becomes even more dominant in the production of charmonium with the presence of more charm pairs Du:2017qkv ; Zhao:2017yan . As charm quarks lose energy as they travel through the QGP Braaten:1991we ; Gyulassy:2000fs ; Djordjevic:2003zk ; Qin:2007rn , the spectrum of regenerated charmonium depends on the momentum distribution of charm quarks before their coalescence into charmonium states. When charm quarks have a non-thermal distribution, the mean of regenerated charmonium will be larger than that of the thermal case.
This work studies the dependence of charmonium and by employing various momentum distributions of charm quarks. Cold nuclear matter effects have been included in the initial distributions of charm quarks and charmonium. Hot medium evolution is described using hydrodynamic equations. The manuscript is organized as follows. In Section II, the transport model is introduced. In Section III, non-thermal distributions of charm quarks are discussed. Hot medium evolution is given as a background in Section IV. In Section V, the scaled and of charmonium are calculated and compared with experimental data for different non-thermal momentum distributions of charm quarks. Lastly, a final summary is given in Section VI.
II transport model
The distribution of heavy quarkonium in a medium has been extensively studied using various models, including transport models Grandchamp:2003uw ; Du:2015wha ; Chen:2016dke ; Yao:2020eqy ; Yao:2018sgn , coalescence models Zhao:2017yan ; Chen:2021akx ; Thews:2000rj , statistical Hadronization model Braun-Munzinger:2000csl , open quantum system approaches Yao:2021lus ; Brambilla:2020qwo ; Akamatsu:2018xim , etc. Transport model takes into account both primordial production and regeneration. The Boltzmann transport equation for charmonium evolution is written as Yan:2006ve ,
(1) |
where the distribution of charmonium in phase space, denoted by , varies over time due to charmonium diffusion which is represented by the term . is the velocity of charmonium. The decay rate accounts for inelastic collisions and the color screening effect that can dissociate charmonium states. This rate depends on both the density of light partons and the inelastic cross sections Zhu:2004nw ,
(2) |
where and are the momentum and the energy of thermal gluons. is the transverse energy of charmonium with the mass GeV. is the Bose distribution of massless gluons. The step function ensures that the gluon-dissociation process only happens above the critical temperature of the deconfined phase transition. is the charmonium dissociation probability in the reaction , where is the center-of-mass energy of the gluon and the charmonium. is the flux factor. is the gluon-dissociation cross section. It is obtained via the operator-production-expansion (OPE) method Peskin:1979va ; Bhanot:1979vb ,
(3) |
We use to represent the gluon energy, while refers to the ratio of the gluon energy to the in-medium binding energy . The constant factor has charm quark mass GeV. For loosely bound excited states such as and , we obtain the decay widths using the geometry scale Chen:2018kfo .
Above the critical temperature, heavy quark potential is partially restored Lafferty:2019jpr ; Liu:2018syc , allowing charm and anti-charm quarks to combine and form new bound states through the reaction . The regeneration rate of charmonium is proportional to the densities of charm and anti-charm quarks,
(4) |
where and represent the momentum of charm and anti-charm quarks respectively. denotes the energy of charm quark. The probability of combination of and , denoted by , is determined through the detailed balance. The delta function ensures a four energy-momentum conservation in the reaction. Charm quark distribution in the QGP will be obtained by fitting the results from the Langevin model He:2014cla ; Qin:2010pf ; Xu:2017obm .
III non-thermal distribution of charm quarks
Heavy quarks experience significant energy loss when they move through a hot medium. The Langevin equation can be used to obtain the spatial and momentum distributions of heavy quarks. For simplicity, we assume that the heavy quark distribution in phase space can be separated into a production of the spatial density and the momentum distribution as . The spatial density decreases with the times in the expanding QGP. It mainly affects the yield of regenerated charmonium. Therefore, we approximate the spatial density with the diffusion equation, Zhou:2014kka , which is usually used in the limit of the kinetic thermalization. The heavy quark spatial density only depends on the four-velocity of the medium, which is given by hydrodynamic equations. The initial profile of is proportional to the , where ALICE:2021dhb ; LHCb:2016ikn are the rapidity differential cross sections of charm quarks in central and forward rapidities respectively. is the nuclear thickness function.
As for the momentum distribution, charm quarks do not reach kinetic thermalization during charmonium regeneration. The realistic momentum distribution of charm quarks in the QGP is obtained by the event-by-event simulations of the Langevin equation Cao:2015hia ; He:2019vgs . Charm quarks are randomly regenerated according to the momentum distribution obtained from FONLL calculation Cacciari:1998it ; Cacciari:2001td . These charm quarks are evolved in QGP with the Langevin equation, where heavy quark energy loss is determined by the spatial diffusion coefficient , which has been previously used for open heavy flavor hadrons He:2012df ; Rapp:2018qla ; Dong:2019unq . When charm quarks move to regions with a relatively low temperature, the heavy quark potential is partially restored and and can combine into a bound state. Most are regenerated below the temperature where the heavy quark potential is mostly restored at the distance of the radius Satz:2005hx ; Chen:2018kfo . The normalized momentum distribution of charm quarks on the hypersurface with is given by the Langevin equation. It is plotted as dots in Fig.1.

To incorporate the non-thermal distribution of charm quarks into the transport model, we use the Fermi distribution to simulate a distribution that is close to the realistic distribution given by the Langevin model. The parameter in the Fermi distribution can be determined based on the realistic distribution of charm,
(5) |
where does not represent the temperature of the medium anymore. It characterizes the realistic momentum distribution of charm quarks in the regeneration process and is connected with the charm energy loss in the medium. is the normalization factor satisfying the relation . and are the four-velocity and four-momentum of the fluid and charm quarks respectively. We take the spatial diffusion coefficient to evolve charm quarks in the QGP and stop the evolution at . In Fig.1, the normalized final transverse momentum distribution of charm quarks in the most central Pb-Pb collisions is plotted with dots. Different Fermi distributions are also plotted where is taken as different values. When is larger than the medium temperature , it indicates that charm quarks are further away from the kinetic thermalization. The line with GeV fits the Langevin results better than other lines. Furthermore, the degree of charm kinetic thermalization differs in different collision centralities. We will take different transverse momentum distributions of charm quarks in the charmonium regeneration.
IV hot medium evolution
Relativistic heavy ion collisions produce a hot, deconfined medium that behaves like a nearly perfect fluid. The dynamical evolution of the medium can be described with hydrodynamic equations. We assume that the longitudinal expansion of the hot medium follows a Bjorken evolution and use 2+1 dimensional ideal hydrodynamic equations to simulate its expansion,
(6) |
The energy-momentum tensor is . is the four-velocity of the medium. Energy density and the pressure change with the times and the position. An equation of the state of the medium is necessary to close the equations. QGP is treated as an ideal gas made up of massless quarks, gluons and the strange quark with a mass of MeV. Meanwhile the hadronic medium is treated as an ideal gas composed of all known hadrons and resonances with mass up to 2 GeV ParticleDataGroup:2020ssz . The phase transition between the QGP and the hadronic gas is a first-order phase transition with a critical temperature MeV Sollfrank:1996hd . The initial energy density of the medium is determined by the final charged multiplicity, where the maximum initial temperature at the center of the fireball is extracted to be MeV at the starting time of hydrodynamic equations in the most central TeV Pb-Pb collisions Zhao:2017yhj . fm is the time scale of the medium reaching local equilibrium Shen:2014vra . The initial temperatures at other positions are obtained with the Glauber model.
V Initial conditions
At the beginning of nuclear collisions, charmonium production is produced in parton hard scatterings. Their production can be treated as the production in pp collisions scaled with the number of binary collisions . In pp collisions without hot medium effects, the momentum distribution of has been measured in experiments, which can be parametrized using a power law function,
(7) |
where the parameters are fitted to be and in the central rapidities, and the rapidity differential cross section of inclusive is taken to be (in central rapidity) ALICE:2012vup ; ALICE:2012vpz ; CMS:2018gbb . In the forward rapidity, the differential cross section is fitted to be . For excited states of charmonium, their normalized distribution is the same as the distribution of due to the small difference between their masses. The inclusive charmonium consists of both the non-prompt part from B decay, and the prompt part which is defined as the sum of the primordial production and the regeneration. The inclusive nuclear modification factor related to the prompt and the non-prompt is as follows Chen:2013wmr ,
(8) |
where the and is the prompt and the non-prompt nuclear modification factors. is the ratio of non-prompt and prompt charmonium production in pp collisions. The fraction of non-prompt in the inclusive production is fitted to be CDF:2004jtw ; CMS:2010nis ; ALICE:2012vpz , without clear dependence on the collision energy. is calculated with the transport model which includes charmonium dissociation and regeneration. While in the non-prompt part, the final distribution of non-prompt is connected with the bottom quark energy loss in the hot medium. The non-prompt nuclear modification factor can be extracted from the Langevin equation Yang:2023rgb .
Charmonium initial distribution in AA collisions is also modified by the cold nuclear matter effects compared with the case in pp collisions. The partons scatter with other nucleons to obtain extra energy before fusing into charm pairs and charmonium. This process is called the Cronin effect Cronin:1974zm , making the momentum distribution of primordial charmonium become harder than the distribution extracted in pp collisions. This is included via the modification . Here is the average path length of partons traveling through the nucleus before the hard scattering. The transverse momentum square parton obtained per unit length is denoted by . The value of is determined to be Chen:2016dke ; Zhou:2014kka based on the charmonium momentum broadening observed in proton-nucleus collisions. Another important cold nuclear matter effect is the shadowing effect Mueller:1985wy . Parton densities in the nucleons of the nucleus become different compared to those in free nucleons. This effect results in the suppression of parton density and hence the reduction of the number of charmonium and charm pairs in heavy-ion collisions. The shadowing effect is calculated to be 0.6 in the most central Pb-Pb collisions at TeV with the EPS09 package Eskola:2009uj . The shadowing factor at other centralities can be obtained via the scale of the thickness function Zhou:2014kka .
VI charmonium distribution in heavy-ion collisions
In the regeneration, when the charm quark momentum distribution becomes different, the distribution of regenerated charmonium from the reaction also becomes different. Additionally, the total production of charmonium depends on the degree of charm kinetic thermalization. To focus on the shape of charmonium distribution with different non-thermal distributions of charm quarks, the total yields of regeneration are scaled to the same value to fit the experimental data of in the most central collisions. With this disposure, we can clearly see how the distribution of charmonium and are affected by the non-thermal charm quarks, especially at middle and high .
In Fig.2, we calculated the nuclear modification factor as a function of in the centrality 0-10% in TeV Pb-Pb collisions, where regeneration dominates the total production of . With smaller , charm quark momentum distribution before regeneration becomes softer, leading to regenerated charmonia carry small and are distributed in low region. At middle and high , regeneration contribution becomes negligible as the density of charm quarks is small, shown as the lines labeled with and GeV. These lines with softer charm distributions underestimate the experimental data at middle . When the momentum distribution of charm quarks becomes harder, such as the cases with GeV, regenerated tends to carry larger and enhance the inclusive production of at GeV/c, shown as the lines GeV. However, when the charm momentum distribution used in the regeneration becomes extremely hard ( GeV), the inclusive enhances significantly at high which is far away from the realistic case. Inspired by the realistic distributions of charm quarks given by the Langevin equation in Fig.1, the value of is expected to be around GeV. We can see that the shape of the line with GeV can give a better explanation of the data compared to the case of completely kinetic thermalization ( GeV).

In Fig.3, the elliptic flows of inclusive are also calculated by taking different non-thermal distributions of charm quarks. Primordially produced charmonium carries small elliptic flows when moving along different trajectories in the anisotropic medium. Charmonium dissociation along different paths results in a non-zero through medium dissociation. This effect becomes important at large where primordial production dominates the total yield of . On the other hand, charm quarks are strongly coupled with QGP. Charm quarks develop collective flows via elastic scatterings with thermal partons, which will be inherited by the regenerated . Therefore, when the charm momentum distribution becomes harder, the regenerated s are mainly distributed at higher . The elliptic flows of inclusive are enhanced by the regeneration. When charm quarks are kinetically thermalized, they satisfy a normalized Fermi distribution with the medium temperature . In the non-thermal cases, charm distributions become hard, and are characterized by a parameter which is usually larger than the medium temperature. Lines with GeV can better explain the large at GeV/c than cases with softer charm distributions. This indicates that regeneration is still important in this middle region.

From the shapes of and , one can see that regeneration with non-thermal momentum distributions of charm quarks becomes more important at middle and high . This will increase the elliptic flows of at GeV/c. While in the thermal case, the contribution of regeneration decreases rapidly with increasing . The parameter characterizing the degree of charm kinetic thermalization is extracted to be around GeV, which is larger than the medium temperatures of charmonium regeneration. Charm momentum distribution is expected to be non-thermal when charmonium regeneration happens, even when mesons are close to kinetic thermalization after experiencing the whole evolution of the hot medium.
VII Summary
We employ the transport model to study the distribution of charmonium with non-thermal charm quarks in TeV Pb-Pb collisions. As the heavy quark potential is partially restored above the critical temperature , charmonium can be regenerated above where charm quarks do not reach complete kinetic thermalization. The realistic momentum distribution of charm quarks in charmonium regeneration is simulated with the Langevin equation. To incorporate non-thermal charm distributions into the transport model, we introduce a parameter in a normalized Fermi distribution, where is determined by fitting the realistic distribution of charm quarks from the Langevin model. The value of is found to be larger than the temperature of regeneration, which indicates that the charm quark distribution is harder than that in the thermal case. We take different values of in the transport model to calculate and . The regeneration of charmonium with different non-thermal distributions has been scaled to fit the of , which allows us to focus on the shapes of and when taking different momentum distributions of charm quarks. The and enhance evidently at middle when taking a non-thermal charm distribution, as more charm quarks and regenerated charmonium are distributed in middle and high region. This helps to extract the realistic momentum distribution of charm quarks in charmonium regeneration.
Acknowledgement: Chaoyu Pan and Shuhan Zheng contributed equally to this work. This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) under Grant Nos. 12175165.
References
- (1) A. Bazavov, T. Bhattacharya, M. Cheng, C. DeTar, H. T. Ding, S. Gottlieb, R. Gupta, P. Hegde, U. M. Heller and F. Karsch, et al. Phys. Rev. D 85, 054503 (2012)
- (2) T. Matsui and H. Satz, Phys. Lett. B 178, 416-422 (1986).
- (3) H. Stoecker, Nucl. Phys. A 750, 121-147 (2005)
- (4) H. T. Ding, F. Karsch and S. Mukherjee, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 24, no.10, 1530007 (2015)
- (5) J. Zhao, K. Zhou, S. Chen and P. Zhuang, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 114, 103801 (2020)
- (6) X. Zhao and R. Rapp, Nucl. Phys. A 859, 114-125 (2011)
- (7) M. He, R. J. Fries and R. Rapp, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, no.11, 112301 (2013)
- (8) L. Yan, P. Zhuang and N. Xu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 232301 (2006)
- (9) Y. Liu, B. Chen, N. Xu and P. Zhuang, Phys. Lett. B 697, 32-36 (2011)
- (10) B. Chen, M. Hu, H. Zhang and J. Zhao, Phys. Lett. B 802, 135271 (2020)
- (11) L. Wen, X. Du, S. Shi and B. Chen, Chin. Phys. C 46, no.11, 114102 (2022)
- (12) L. Wen and B. Chen, Phys. Lett. B 839, 137774 (2023)
- (13) F. Karsch, D. Kharzeev and H. Satz, Phys. Lett. B 637, 75-80 (2006)
- (14) H. Satz, J. Phys. G 32, R25 (2006)
- (15) Y. Liu, N. Xu and P. Zhuang, Phys. Lett. B 724, 73-76 (2013)
- (16) X. Guo, S. Shi and P. Zhuang, Phys. Lett. B 718, 143-146 (2012)
- (17) B. Chen, Y. Liu, K. Zhou and P. Zhuang, Phys. Lett. B 726, 725-728 (2013)
- (18) A. Adil and I. Vitev, Phys. Lett. B 649, 139-146 (2007)
- (19) C. Y. Wong, E. S. Swanson and T. Barnes, Phys. Rev. C 65, 014903 (2002) [erratum: Phys. Rev. C 66, 029901 (2002)]
- (20) X. l. Zhu, P. f. Zhuang and N. Xu, Phys. Lett. B 607, 107-114 (2005)
- (21) X. Du, R. Rapp and M. He, Phys. Rev. C 96, no.5, 054901 (2017)
- (22) J. Zhao and B. Chen, Phys. Lett. B 776, 17-21 (2018)
- (23) E. Braaten and M. H. Thoma, Phys. Rev. D 44, no.9, R2625 (1991)
- (24) M. Gyulassy, P. Levai and I. Vitev, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 5535-5538 (2000)
- (25) M. Djordjevic and M. Gyulassy, Nucl. Phys. A 733, 265-298 (2004)
- (26) G. Y. Qin, J. Ruppert, C. Gale, S. Jeon, G. D. Moore and M. G. Mustafa, Phys. Rev. Lett. 100, 072301 (2008)
- (27) L. Grandchamp, R. Rapp and G. E. Brown, Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 12301 (2004)
- (28) X. Du and R. Rapp, Nucl. Phys. A 943, 147-158 (2015)
- (29) B. Chen, T. Guo, Y. Liu and P. Zhuang, Phys. Lett. B 765, 323-327 (2017)
- (30) X. Yao and B. Müller, Phys. Rev. D 100, no.1, 014008 (2019)
- (31) X. Yao and T. Mehen, JHEP 02, 062 (2021)
- (32) R. L. Thews, M. Schroedter and J. Rafelski, Phys. Rev. C 63, 054905 (2001)
- (33) B. Chen, L. Jiang, X. H. Liu, Y. Liu and J. Zhao, Phys. Rev. C 105, no.5, 054901 (2022)
- (34) P. Braun-Munzinger and J. Stachel, Phys. Lett. B 490, 196-202 (2000)
- (35) N. Brambilla, M. Á. Escobedo, M. Strickland, A. Vairo, P. Vander Griend and J. H. Weber, JHEP 05, 136 (2021)
- (36) Y. Akamatsu, M. Asakawa, S. Kajimoto and A. Rothkopf, JHEP 07, 029 (2018)
- (37) X. Yao, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 36, no.20, 2130010 (2021)
- (38) M. E. Peskin, Nucl. Phys. B 156, 365-390 (1979)
- (39) G. Bhanot and M. E. Peskin, Nucl. Phys. B 156, 391-416 (1979)
- (40) B. Chen, Chin. Phys. C 43, no.12, 124101 (2019)
- (41) D. Lafferty and A. Rothkopf, Phys. Rev. D 101, no.5, 056010 (2020)
- (42) S. Y. F. Liu, M. He and R. Rapp, Phys. Rev. C 99, no.5, 055201 (2019)
- (43) G. Y. Qin, H. Petersen, S. A. Bass and B. Muller, Phys. Rev. C 82, 064903 (2010)
- (44) M. He, R. J. Fries and R. Rapp, Phys. Lett. B 735, 445-450 (2014)
- (45) Y. Xu, J. E. Bernhard, S. A. Bass, M. Nahrgang and S. Cao, Phys. Rev. C 97, no.1, 014907 (2018)
- (46) K. Zhou, N. Xu, Z. Xu and P. Zhuang, Phys. Rev. C 89, no.5, 054911 (2014)
- (47) S. Acharya et al. [ALICE], Phys. Rev. D 105, no.1, L011103 (2022)
- (48) R. Aaij et al. [LHCb], JHEP 06, 147 (2017)
- (49) S. Cao, G. Y. Qin and S. A. Bass, Phys. Rev. C 92, no.2, 024907 (2015)
- (50) M. He and R. Rapp, Phys. Rev. Lett. 124, no.4, 042301 (2020)
- (51) M. Cacciari, M. Greco and P. Nason, JHEP 05, 007 (1998)
- (52) M. Cacciari, S. Frixione and P. Nason, JHEP 03, 006 (2001)
- (53) R. Rapp, P. B. Gossiaux, A. Andronic, R. Averbeck, S. Masciocchi, A. Beraudo, E. Bratkovskaya, P. Braun-Munzinger, S. Cao and A. Dainese, et al. Nucl. Phys. A 979, 21-86 (2018)
- (54) X. Dong and V. Greco, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 104, 97-141 (2019)
- (55) P. A. Zyla et al. [Particle Data Group], PTEP 2020, no.8, 083C01 (2020)
- (56) J. Sollfrank, P. Huovinen, M. Kataja, P. V. Ruuskanen, M. Prakash and R. Venugopalan, Phys. Rev. C 55, 392-410 (1997)
- (57) W. Zhao, H. j. Xu and H. Song, Eur. Phys. J. C 77, no.9, 645 (2017)
- (58) C. Shen, Z. Qiu, H. Song, J. Bernhard, S. Bass and U. Heinz, Comput. Phys. Commun. 199, 61-85 (2016)
- (59) B. Abelev et al. [ALICE], Phys. Lett. B 718, 295-306 (2012) [erratum: Phys. Lett. B 748, 472-473 (2015)]
- (60) A. M. Sirunyan et al. [CMS], Phys. Lett. B 790, 509-532 (2019)
- (61) B. Abelev et al. [ALICE], JHEP 11, 065 (2012)
- (62) D. Acosta et al. [CDF], Phys. Rev. D 71, 032001 (2005)
- (63) V. Khachatryan et al. [CMS], Eur. Phys. J. C 71, 1575 (2011)
- (64) M. Yang, S. Zheng, B. Tong, J. Zhao, W. Ouyang, K. Zhou and B. Chen, [arXiv:2302.06179 [nucl-th]].
- (65) J. W. Cronin et al. [E100], Phys. Rev. D 11, 3105-3123 (1975)
- (66) A. H. Mueller and J. w. Qiu, Nucl. Phys. B 268, 427-452 (1986)
- (67) K. J. Eskola, H. Paukkunen and C. A. Salgado, JHEP 04, 065 (2009)
- (68) S. Acharya et al. [ALICE], JHEP 02, 041 (2020)
- (69) S. Acharya et al. [ALICE], Phys. Rev. Lett. 119, no.24, 242301 (2017)
- (70) S. Acharya et al. [ALICE], JHEP 10, 141 (2020)