Measurement of the low-energy antideuteron inelastic cross section
EEUROPEAN ORGANIZATION FOR NUCLEAR RESEARCH
CERN-EP-2020-07814 May 2020c (cid:13)
Measurement of the low-energy antideuteron inelastic cross section
ALICE Collaboration ∗ Abstract
In this Letter, we report the first measurement of the antideuteron inelastic cross section at low parti-cle momenta, covering a range of 0 . ≤ p < / c . The measurement is carried out using p–Pbcollisions at a center-of-mass energy per nucleon–nucleon pair of √ s NN = .
02 TeV, recorded withthe ALICE detector at the CERN LHC and utilizing the detector material as an absorber for an-tideuterons and antiprotons. The extracted raw primary antiparticle-to-particle ratios are comparedto the results from detailed ALICE simulations based on the G
EANT (cid:104) A (cid:105) = 17.4 and 31.8 is obtained. Themeasured inelastic cross section points to a possible excess with respect to the Glauber model pa-rameterization used in G EANT . ≤ p < .
47 GeV / c up toa factor 2.1. This result is relevant for the understanding of antimatter propagation and the con-tributions to antinuclei production from cosmic ray interactions within the interstellar medium. Inaddition, the momentum range covered by this measurement is of particular importance to evaluatesignal predictions for indirect dark-matter searches. ∗ See Appendix B for the list of collaboration members a r X i v : . [ nu c l - e x ] J un easurement of the low-energy antideuteron inelastic cross section ALICE CollaborationThe possible presence of antinuclei in the Milky Way could be explained either by reactions ofhigh-energy cosmic rays with the interstellar medium or by more exotic sources, such as dark-matterannihilation [1]. Some dark-matter models [2, 3] predict that low-energy antideuterons are a promisingprobe for indirect dark-matter searches since the contributions from cosmic-ray interactions in the energyrange below 1-2 GeV per nucleon [2–5] are expected to be rather small. For this reason, the search forantinuclei has been intensified in recent years with new satellite and balloon-borne experiments such asAMS-02 [6] and GAPS [7]. So far, no clear evidence of antinuclei production has been found [8, 9], butdedicated analyses searching for antideuteron and antihelium are currently ongoing [10, 11].In order to get a reliable baseline for antideuteron production at low energies, realistic models ofcosmic-ray transport are necessary. In addition, also the predicted flux of antinuclei from dark-matterannihilation depends on the production mechanism and antinuclei transport properties within the inter-stellar medium. There are three main relevant mechanisms that determine the signal and backgroundrates: i) the antideuteron production, either in p–A and A–A reactions between cosmic rays and theinterstellar medium depending on the element abundance, or in dark-matter annihilation processes, ii)the antideuteron propagation in the galaxy, the heliosphere and the Earth’s atmosphere and iii) inelasticprocesses such as nuclear breakup, charge exchange or annihilation that occur during propagation andin experiments inside the detectors. These three mechanisms must be measured as precisely as possibleto interpret correctly any future measurement in satellite and balloon-borne experiments. While thepropagation has been constrained by measuring different nuclei from primary and secondary cosmicrays [12–15], accelerator experiments can be used to study the production and the inelastic scatteringcross sections.Antimatter is copiously produced in high-energy collisions of protons and heavy ions. This environmentis hence well suited to study antinuclei properties. At RHIC, the STAR and PHENIX Collaborationshave measured d, He and He [16–19] yields employing Au–Au collisions at center-of-mass energiesper nucleon-nucleon pair of √ s NN =
130 GeV and √ s NN =
200 GeV. At the LHC, the ALICE Col-laboration has studied d, He and He production in pp, p–Pb and Pb–Pb collisions at center-of-massenergies per nucleon pair from 0.9 to 13 TeV [20–26] and the yields obtained have been interpreted bymeans of coalescence or statistical hadronization models [27–29]. The LHC measurements combinedwith different coalescence models have been employed to estimate the antideuteron and antihelium fluxfrom cosmic-ray interactions measurable by the AMS-02 and GAPS experiments [11, 30–32]. Since theinelastic cross sections for antinuclei are barely known, all the available calculations rely on poorly con-strained parameterizations. For antideuterons, the inelastic cross sections have been measured for severalmaterials only for two momentum values, p = . / c [33] and p =
25 GeV / c [34]. However, thelow-momentum range accessible by ALICE ( p ≤ / c ) remains unexplored. For antihelium, nomeasurement of inelastic cross sections is available.In this Letter we present a method to evaluate the inelastic cross section of antinuclei based on themeasurement of raw reconstructed antiparticle-to-particle ratios. We report the first measurement of theantideuteron inelastic cross section in the momentum range of 0 . ≤ p < / c . The results presentedare based on data collected during the 2016 p–Pb LHC run at √ s NN = .
02 TeV. The performance ofthe ALICE detector and the description of its subsystems can be found in [35, 36]. Collision events areselected by using the information from the V0 detector, which consists of two plastic scintillator arrayslocated on both sides of the interaction point at forward and backward pseudorapidities. A simultaneoussignal in both arrays was used as a minimum-bias (MB) trigger. In total, about 600 million MB eventsare selected for further analysis, which correspond to an integrated luminosity of L MBint =
287 µb − , witha relative uncertainty of 3.7% [37].The charged-particle tracks are reconstructed in the ALICE central barrel with the Inner Tracking System(ITS) and the Time Projection Chamber (TPC), which are located within a solenoid that provides ahomogeneous magnetic field of 0 . ) c (GeV/ p / p ) p R a w ( – ALICE = 5.02 TeV NN s Pb - p MC Geant4DataITS+TPC analysisITS+TPC+TOF analysis ) c (GeV/ primary p D a t a / M C ) c (GeV/ p / d ) d R a w ( – ALICE = 5.02 TeV NN s Pb - p MC Geant4DataITS+TPC analysisITS+TPC+TOF analysis ) c (GeV/ primary p D a t a / M C Figure 1:
Raw primary p / p (left) and d / d (right) ratios as a function of the momentum p primary . Experimental dataare shown in blue, the statistical and systematic uncertainties are shown as vertical bars and boxes. The results fromALICE MC simulations based on G EANT / p and 3% for ¯d / d)is not shown in the top panels. The bottom panels display the ratios of experimental data to MC simulations withstatistical, systematic and global uncertainties added in quadrature. layers of silicon detectors located at radial distances from the beam axis between 3 . r =
85 cm to r =
247 cm, is 5 m long and was filled with an Ar-CO gasmixture during the 2016 data taking period. These two subsystems provide full azimuthal coverage forcharged-particle trajectories in the pseudorapidity range | η lab | < .
8. The selected tracks must fulfillbasic quality criteria established in antinuclei analyses in p–Pb collisions [25]. These criteria guaranteea resolution of about 2% on the momentum reconstructed at the primary vertex ( p primary ) in this analysis.The TPC is also used for the particle identification (PID) of (anti)protons and (anti)deuterons via theirspecific energy loss d E / d x in the gas volume, with a resolution of about 5% [38]. The n ( σ TPC i ) variablerepresents the PID response in the TPC expressed in terms of the deviation between the measured andexpected d E / d x for a particle species i , normalized by the detector resolution σ . (Anti)protons and(anti)deuterons are selected by applying the selection criterion | n ( σ TPC i ) | <
3. This selection is sufficientto obtain a purity close to 100% for (anti)protons and (anti)deuterons in the momentum range below0 . / c and 1 . / c , respectively. For the momentum range above 0 . / c for (anti)protonsand 0 . / c for (anti)deuterons, the PID is complemented by the Time-Of-Flight (TOF) system,consisting of Multi-Gap Resistive Plate Chambers. (Anti)proton and (anti)deuteron candidates selectedin the TPC are matched to TOF hits and fits to the squared-mass distributions are performed for differentmomentum intervals [25]. The PID purity in all momentum intervals is found to be higher than 88% and47% for the (anti)proton and (anti)deuteron samples, respectively. The background is subtracted fromthe squared-mass spectra with a two-component fit [25].The determination of the inelastic cross section requires precise knowledge of the ALICE detector ma-terial. The MC parameterization of the ALICE material budget up to the outer TPC vessel was validatedwith photon conversion analyses within a precision of ∼ .
5% [36] and it is shown in the supplementalmaterial [URL will be inserted by publisher]. The ALICE detector material from the primary interactionpoint up to the TOF has an average atomic number of (cid:104) Z (cid:105) = . (cid:104) A (cid:105) = . (cid:104) Z (cid:105) = . (cid:104) A (cid:105) = . ) c (GeV/ primary p / p ) p R a w ( ALICE = 5.02 TeV NN s Pb - p · ) p( inel s MC simulations with )p( inel s MC simulations with default 1.25 · ) p( inel s MC simulations with global) ¯ syst. ¯ = stat. s (1 s – Data
Figure 2:
Raw primary p / p ratio as a function of momentum. Blue boxes indicate ± σ experimental limits.The results from MC simulations with varied σ inel ( p ) are shown as green and magenta bands, and gray bandcorresponds to the results with default σ inel ( p ) . The uncertainties on MC results include the variations of elasticcross sections and the variation of σ inel ( p ) . The selected (anti)proton and deuteron candidates include a substantial amount of background from sec-ondary (anti)particles that originate from weak decays of hyperons or from spallation reactions in thedetector material. Following the procedure described in [20, 39, 40], the contribution from secondary(anti)particles is subtracted by performing a fit to the distribution of the measured distance of closestapproach (DCA) of track candidates to the primary vertex with templates from Monte Carlo (MC) sim-ulations. In contrast to secondary particles, primary particles point back to the primary vertex, hence adistinct structure peaked at zero in the DCA distribution characterizes the primary particles. Secondaryparticles correspond to a flat DCA distribution and their contribution can therefore be separated [20, 22].The fraction of secondary (anti)protons is found to be around 20% in the lowest momentum intervalanalysed (0 . ≤ p primary < . / c ) and decreases monotonically down to ∼ .
5% at high momenta.The main contribution of secondary (anti)protons stems from weak decays. For deuterons, the dominantcontribution of secondary particles comes from spallation processes in the detector material that lead tothe ejection of fragments such as protons, neutrons or deuterons. The fraction of secondary deuterons isfound to be 23.5% in the lowest momentum interval (0 . ≤ p primary < . / c ) and to decrease expo-nentially to negligible values at p primary ∼ . / c . For antiprotons and antideuterons the contributionfrom spallation processes is absent. The feed-down from weak decays of hyperons and hypernuclei hasa negligible impact on the measured ratios [25, 39, 41]. Hence, the antideuteron sample is composed en-tirely from primaries. The momentum spectra are corrected for the background from secondary particlesbut not for the detector efficiency or losses of (anti)particles in the detector material, so they are referredto as raw primary spectra.Figure 1 shows the p / p and d / d ratios as a function of p primary . The systematic uncertainties due to track-ing, particle identification and contribution from secondaries are considered, and the total uncertainty isobtained as the quadratic sum of the individual contributions. It increases from 1% (2%) at low mo-mentum up to 2% (6%) in the high-momentum region for p / p (d / d). The uncertainty on the primordialantimatter-to-matter ratio produced in collisions is considered as a global uncertainty. The primordialp / p ratio 0 . ± .
015 is extrapolated from available measurements [39, 40] and, under the assumptionthat the (anti)deuteron yield is proportional to the squared yield of (anti)protons [42, 43], the primary4easurement of the low-energy antideuteron inelastic cross section ALICE Collaborationd / d ratio amounts to 0 . ± . EANT
EANT
EANT / p ratio and are in qualitative agreement with the data for the d / d ratio.The sensitivity of the antiparticle-to-particle ratios to the modifications of elastic and inelastic cross sec-tions was benchmarked with the p / p measurement. The (anti)proton cross sections have been measuredby various experiments [46–52], and the results are described well by the G EANT ± σ limits for the measured p / p ratio, where 1 σ corresponds tothe quadratic sum of statistical, systematic and global uncertainties. The green and magenta bands showthe simulated ratios with a variation of ±
25% of the inelastic antiproton cross section along with the sim-ulations using default cross section (gray band). Only a variation of the total inelastic cross section hasbeen carried out. The widths of the bands correspond to a quadratic sum of the contributions from twoadditional variations: i) the elastic cross sections of protons and antiprotons are changed independentlyby ± (cid:46) .
5% modification of the ratio and ii) the inelastic proton–nucleus crosssection is varied by 3 . EANT .
5% in theratio. These systematic checks demonstrate that the antiparticle-to-particle ratio is mainly sensitive to thevariation of the inelastic cross sections and can therefore be used to measure the antideuteron inelasticcross section.Extending this recipe, an iterative and momentum-dependent variation of σ inel ( p ) within the G EANT / p ratios that correspond to the ± σ and ± σ experimental limits.The resulting ± σ and ± σ limits for σ inel ( p ) are presented in panels a) and b) of Fig. 3 together withstandard G EANT (cid:104) Z (cid:105) = . (cid:104) A (cid:105) = .
4; panel b) refers to the analysis additionally employing the TOF and corresponds to (cid:104) Z (cid:105) = . (cid:104) A (cid:105) = .
8. The inelastic cross sections shown in Fig. 3 are estimated as a function of the momentum p at which the inelastic interaction occurs. Due to the continuous energy loss of the particle insidethe detector material, this momentum is lower than p primary reconstructed at the primary vertex. Thecorresponding correction is estimated with the help of MC simulations by using the average valuesfrom the correlation between these two momenta. The corresponding uncertainty is then propagatedto the cross section measurement considering the 1 RMS variation in the correlation. The minimummomentum reconstructed at the primary vertex amounts to p primary = . / c for antiprotons andto p primary = . / c for antideuterons, and the energy-loss correction transforms these values to p = .
18 GeV / c and p = . / c , correspondingly. For momenta p > . / c , the antiprotoninelastic cross section is found to be in good agreement with the G EANT
EANT / d ratio andthe G EANT σ inel ( d ) varied in a similar way as for antiprotons. For this pur-pose, the same uncertainties are considered: i) the variation of elastic cross sections of (anti)deuterons by ±
20% that results in (cid:46)
2% deviation for the ratio, ii) the variation of the inelastic deuteron cross sectionby 7% that corresponds to the precision of G
EANT (cid:46)
1% uncertainty) and iii) theuncertainty from the primordial d / d ratio (3 . σ inel ( d ) for targets with (cid:104) Z (cid:105) = . (cid:104) A (cid:105) = . (cid:104) Z (cid:105) = . (cid:104) A (cid:105) = . ) c (GeV/ p ) ( b ) p ( i ne l s ALICE = 5.02 TeV NN s Pb - p | < 0.8 h = 17.4, | æ A Æ = 8.5, æ Z Æ (a) ) Geant4 p( inel s Data (ITS+TPC) s – ) p( inel s s – ) p( inel s ) c (GeV/ p ) ( b ) p ( i ne l s ALICE = 5.02 TeV NN s Pb - p | < 0.8 h = 31.8, | æ A Æ = 14.8, æ Z Æ (b) ) Geant4 p( inel s Data (ITS+TPC+TOF) s – ) p( inel s s – ) p( inel s ) c (GeV/ p ) ( b ) d ( i ne l s ALICE = 5.02 TeV NN s Pb - p | < 0.8 h = 17.4, | æ A Æ = 8.5, æ Z Æ (c) ) Geant4 d( inel s Data (ITS+TPC) s – ) d( inel s s – ) d( inel s ) c (GeV/ p ) ( b ) d ( i ne l s ALICE = 5.02 TeV NN s Pb - p | < 0.8 h = 31.8, | æ A Æ = 14.8, æ Z Æ (d) ) Geant4 d( inel s Data (ITS+TPC+TOF) s – ) d( inel s s – ) d( inel s Figure 3:
Inelastic interaction cross section for antiprotons and antideuterons on an average material elementof the ALICE detector as a function of the momentum p at which the interaction occurs. The top row showsthe results for antiprotons, the bottom row for antideuterons and the results from the ITS+TPC (ITS+TPC+TOF)analysis are shown on the left (right). Dashed lines represent the G EANT ± ± σ constraints from the raw primary ratios. presented here include all possible inelastic antideuteron processes and represent the first measurementin this low-momentum range.While the measured σ inel ( d ) is found to be in agreement with the G EANT . ≤ p < . / c momentum range, it rises faster than the simulated parameterization in the mo-mentum range 0 . ≤ p < . / c , reaching a maximal discrepancy of a factor 2 . . ≤ p < .
47 GeV / c .These measurements can now help to better understand the antideuteron inelastic processes at low mo-menta and to improve the parameterization of the inelastic cross section used in G EANT
4. Additionally,these results are now available for models of the propagation of antideuterons within the interstellarmedium [10, 31, 55] and will impact the flux expectations at low momentum near Earth.In summary, we have shown how the ALICE detector can be used as an absorber to study the antinucleiinelastic scattering cross section on detector material. The antiparticle-to-particle ratios method was val-idated using (anti)protons and the sensitivity of the ratio to the variation of the inelastic cross section wasdemonstrated. In this way, the first measurement of the inelastic scattering cross section of antideuteronswas performed on an effective target with mean charge number (cid:104) Z (cid:105) = . (cid:104) A (cid:105) = . . ≤ p < . / c , and with (cid:104) Z (cid:105) = . (cid:104) A (cid:105) = . . ≤ p < . / c . These cross sections can now be used in propagation models of antideuterons within the in-terstellar medium for dark-matter searches. Future studies of high-statistics pp, p–Pb and Pb–Pb datacollected during the second (2015–2018) and third (scheduled to start in 2021) LHC run campaignsshould allow the measurement of inelastic cross sections of heavier antinuclei such as He and He in a6easurement of the low-energy antideuteron inelastic cross section ALICE Collaborationsimilar way.
Acknowledgements
The ALICE Collaboration would like to thank all its engineers and technicians for their invaluable con-tributions to the construction of the experiment and the CERN accelerator teams for the outstandingperformance of the LHC complex. The ALICE Collaboration gratefully acknowledges the resources andsupport provided by all Grid centres and the Worldwide LHC Computing Grid (WLCG) collaboration.The ALICE Collaboration acknowledges the following funding agencies for their support in buildingand running the ALICE detector: A. I. Alikhanyan National Science Laboratory (Yerevan Physics In-stitute) Foundation (ANSL), State Committee of Science and World Federation of Scientists (WFS),Armenia; Austrian Academy of Sciences, Austrian Science Fund (FWF): [M 2467-N36] and National-stiftung für Forschung, Technologie und Entwicklung, Austria; Ministry of Communications and HighTechnologies, National Nuclear Research Center, Azerbaijan; Conselho Nacional de DesenvolvimentoCientífico e Tecnológico (CNPq), Financiadora de Estudos e Projetos (Finep), Fundação de Amparo àPesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) and Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS),Brazil; Ministry of Education of China (MOEC) , Ministry of Science & Technology of China (MSTC)and National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC), China; Ministry of Science and Educationand Croatian Science Foundation, Croatia; Centro de Aplicaciones Tecnológicas y Desarrollo Nuclear(CEADEN), Cubaenergía, Cuba; Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic, CzechRepublic; The Danish Council for Independent Research | Natural Sciences, the VILLUM FONDEN andDanish National Research Foundation (DNRF), Denmark; Helsinki Institute of Physics (HIP), Finland;Commissariat à l’Energie Atomique (CEA) and Institut National de Physique Nucléaire et de Physiquedes Particules (IN2P3) and Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), France; Bundesmin-isterium für Bildung und Forschung (BMBF) and GSI Helmholtzzentrum für SchwerionenforschungGmbH, Germany; General Secretariat for Research and Technology, Ministry of Education, Researchand Religions, Greece; National Research, Development and Innovation Office, Hungary; Departmentof Atomic Energy Government of India (DAE), Department of Science and Technology, Governmentof India (DST), University Grants Commission, Government of India (UGC) and Council of Scientificand Industrial Research (CSIR), India; Indonesian Institute of Science, Indonesia; Centro Fermi - MuseoStorico della Fisica e Centro Studi e Ricerche Enrico Fermi and Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare(INFN), Italy; Institute for Innovative Science and Technology , Nagasaki Institute of Applied Science(IIST), Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) and Japan So-ciety for the Promotion of Science (JSPS) KAKENHI, Japan; Consejo Nacional de Ciencia (CONACYT)y Tecnología, through Fondo de Cooperación Internacional en Ciencia y Tecnología (FONCICYT) andDirección General de Asuntos del Personal Academico (DGAPA), Mexico; Nederlandse Organisatievoor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO), Netherlands; The Research Council of Norway, Norway;Commission on Science and Technology for Sustainable Development in the South (COMSATS), Pak-istan; Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Peru; Ministry of Science and Higher Education, NationalScience Centre and WUT ID-UB, Poland; Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information andNational Research Foundation of Korea (NRF), Republic of Korea; Ministry of Education and ScientificResearch, Institute of Atomic Physics and Ministry of Research and Innovation and Institute of AtomicPhysics, Romania; Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (JINR), Ministry of Education and Science ofthe Russian Federation, National Research Centre Kurchatov Institute, Russian Science Foundation andRussian Foundation for Basic Research, Russia; Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport ofthe Slovak Republic, Slovakia; National Research Foundation of South Africa, South Africa; SwedishResearch Council (VR) and Knut & Alice Wallenberg Foundation (KAW), Sweden; European Organi-zation for Nuclear Research, Switzerland; Suranaree University of Technology (SUT), National Scienceand Technology Development Agency (NSDTA) and Office of the Higher Education Commission underNRU project of Thailand, Thailand; Turkish Atomic Energy Agency (TAEK), Turkey; National Academy7easurement of the low-energy antideuteron inelastic cross section ALICE Collaborationof Sciences of Ukraine, Ukraine; Science and Technology Facilities Council (STFC), United Kingdom;National Science Foundation of the United States of America (NSF) and United States Department ofEnergy, Office of Nuclear Physics (DOE NP), United States of America.
References [1] M. Cirelli, N. Fornengo, M. Taoso, and A. Vittino, “Anti-helium from Dark Matter annihilations”,
JHEP (2014) , arXiv:1401.4017 [hep-ph] .[2] A. Ibarra and S. Wild, “Prospects of antideuteron detection from dark matter annihilations ordecays at AMS-02 and GAPS”, JCAP (2013) , arXiv:1209.5539 [hep-ph] .[3] J. Silk et al.,
Particle Dark Matter: Observations, Models and Searches . Cambridge Univ. Press,Cambridge, 2010.[4] T. Aramaki et al., “Review of the theoretical and experimental status of dark matter identificationwith cosmic-ray antideuterons”,
Phys. Rept. (2016) , arXiv:1505.07785 [hep-ph] .[5] N. Fornengo, L. Maccione, and A. Vittino, “Dark matter searches with cosmic antideuterons:status and perspectives”,
JCAP (2013) , arXiv:1306.4171 [hep-ph] .[6]
AMS
Collaboration, A. Kounine, “The Alpha Magnetic Spectrometer on the International SpaceStation”,
Int. J. Mod. Phys.
E21 no. 08, (2012) .[7]
GAPS
Collaboration, C. J. Hailey, “An indirect search for dark matter using antideuterons: theGAPS experiment”,
New J. Phys. no. 10, (2009) .[8] H. Fuke et al., “Search for cosmic-ray antideuterons”, Phys. Rev. Lett. (2005) , arXiv:astro-ph/0504361 [astro-ph] .[9] BESS
Collaboration, K. Abe et al., “Search for Antihelium with the BESS-Polar Spectrometer”,
Phys. Rev. Lett. (2012) , arXiv:1201.2967 [astro-ph.CO] .[10] F. Donato, N. Fornengo, and D. Maurin, “Antideuteron fluxes from dark matter annihilation indiffusion models”,
Phys. Rev.
D78 (2008) , arXiv:0803.2640 [hep-ph] .[11] M. Korsmeier, F. Donato, and N. Fornengo, “Prospects to verify a possible dark matter hint incosmic antiprotons with antideuterons and antihelium”,
Phys. Rev.
D97 no. 10, (2018) , arXiv:1711.08465 [astro-ph.HE] .[12] I. V. Moskalenko and A. W. Strong, “Production and propagation of cosmic ray positrons andelectrons”,
Astrophys. J. (1998) , arXiv:astro-ph/9710124 [astro-ph] .[13] A. W. Strong, I. V. Moskalenko, and V. S. Ptuskin, “Cosmic-ray propagation and interactions inthe Galaxy”,
Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. (2007) , arXiv:astro-ph/0701517 [astro-ph] .[14] M. J. Boschini et al., “Solution of heliospheric propagation: unveiling the local interstellar spectraof cosmic ray species”, Astrophys. J. no. 2, (2017) , arXiv:1704.06337 [astro-ph.HE] .[15] M. J. Boschini et al., “Deciphering the Local Interstellar Spectra of Primary Cosmic-Ray Specieswith HelMod”,
Astrophys. J. no. 1, (2018) , arXiv:1804.06956 [astro-ph.HE] .[16]
STAR
Collaboration, H. Agakishiev et al., “Observation of the antimatter helium-4 nucleus”,
Nature (2011) , arXiv:1103.3312 [nucl-ex] . [Erratum: Nature475,412(2011)].8easurement of the low-energy antideuteron inelastic cross section ALICE Collaboration[17]
STAR
Collaboration, J. Adam et al., “Beam energy dependence of (anti-)deuteron production inAu + Au collisions at the BNL Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider”,
Phys. Rev.
C99 no. 6, (2019) , arXiv:1903.11778 [nucl-ex] .[18]
PHENIX
Collaboration, S. S. Adler et al., “Deuteron and antideuteron production in Au + Aucollisions at s(NN)**(1/2) = 200-GeV”,
Phys. Rev. Lett. (2005) , arXiv:nucl-ex/0406004[nucl-ex] .[19] STAR
Collaboration, C. Adler et al., “ ¯ d and ¯ He production in √ s NN =
130 GeV Au+Aucollisions”,
Phys. Rev. Lett. (2001) , arXiv:nucl-ex/0108022 [nucl-ex] . [Erratum: Phys.Rev. Lett.87,279902(2001)].[20] ALICE
Collaboration, J. Adam et al., “Production of light nuclei and anti-nuclei in pp and Pb-Pbcollisions at energies available at the CERN Large Hadron Collider”,
Phys. Rev.
C93 no. 2, (2016), arXiv:1506.08951 [nucl-ex] .[21]
ALICE
Collaboration, J. Adam et al., “Precision measurement of the mass difference betweenlight nuclei and anti-nuclei”,
Nature Phys. no. 10, (2015) , arXiv:1508.03986 [nucl-ex] .[22] ALICE
Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Production of deuterons, tritons, He nuclei and theirantinuclei in pp collisions at √ s = 0.9, 2.76 and 7 TeV”, Phys. Rev.
C97 no. 2, (2018) , arXiv:1709.08522 [nucl-ex] .[23]
ALICE
Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Production of He and He in Pb–Pb collisions at √ s NN = 2.76 TeV at the LHC”, Nucl. Phys.
A971 (2018) , arXiv:1710.07531 [nucl-ex] .[24]
ALICE
Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Multiplicity dependence of (anti-)deuteron productionin pp collisions at √ s = 7 TeV”, Phys. Lett.
B794 (2019) , arXiv:1902.09290 [nucl-ex] .[25]
ALICE
Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “Multiplicity dependence of light (anti-)nucleiproduction in p-Pb collisions at √ s NN = 5.02 TeV”, arXiv:1906.03136 [nucl-ex] .[26] ALICE
Collaboration, S. Acharya et al., “(Anti-)Deuteron production in pp collisions at √ s = arXiv:2003.03184 [nucl-ex] .[27] J. I. Kapusta, “Mechanisms for deuteron production in relativistic nuclear collisions”, Phys. Rev.
C21 (1980) .[28] K.-J. Sun, C. M. Ko, and B. Dönigus, “Suppression of light nuclei production in collisions ofsmall systems at the Large Hadron Collider”,
Phys. Lett.
B792 (2019) , arXiv:1812.05175[nucl-th] .[29] F. Bellini and A. P. Kalweit, “Testing production scenarios for (anti-)(hyper-)nuclei and exotica atenergies available at the CERN Large Hadron Collider”,
Phys. Rev.
C99 no. 5, (2019) , arXiv:1807.05894 [hep-ph] .[30] M. Kachelrieß, S. Ostapchenko, and J. Tjemsland, “Alternative coalescence model for deuteron,tritium, helium-3 and their antinuclei”,
Eur. Phys. J. A no. 1, (2020) , arXiv:1905.01192[hep-ph] .[31] M. Kachelriess, S. Ostapchenko, and J. Tjemsland, “Revisiting cosmic ray antinuclei fluxes with anew coalescence mode”, arXiv:2002.10481 [hep-ph] .[32] K. Blum, K. C. Y. Ng, R. Sato, and M. Takimoto, “Cosmic rays, antihelium, and an old navyspotlight”, Phys. Rev.
D96 no. 10, (2017) , arXiv:1704.05431 [astro-ph.HE] .9easurement of the low-energy antideuteron inelastic cross section ALICE Collaboration[33] S. P. Denisov et al., “Measurements of anti-deuteron absorption and stripping cross sections at themomentum 13.3 GeV/ c ”, Nucl. Phys.
B31 (1971) .[34] F. G. Binon et al., “Absorption cross-sections of 25 GeV/ c antideuterons in Li, C, Al, Cu and Pb”, Phys. Lett. (1970) .[35]
ALICE
Collaboration, K. Aamodt et al., “The ALICE experiment at the CERN LHC”,
JINST (2008) .[36] ALICE
Collaboration, B. Abelev et al., “Performance of the ALICE Experiment at the CERNLHC”,
Int. J. Mod. Phys.
A29 (2014) , arXiv:1402.4476 [nucl-ex] .[37]
ALICE
Collaboration, B. Abelev et al., “Measurement of visible cross sections in proton-leadcollisions at √ s NN = 5.02 TeV in van der Meer scans with the ALICE detector”, JINST no. 11,(2014) , arXiv:1405.1849 [nucl-ex] .[38] ALICE-TPC
Collaboration, J. Alme et al., “The ALICE TPC, a large 3-dimensional trackingdevice with fast readout for ultra-high multiplicity events”,
Nucl. Instrum. Meth.
A622 (2010) , arXiv:1001.1950 [physics.ins-det] .[39]
ALICE
Collaboration, E. Abbas et al., “Mid-rapidity anti-baryon to baryon ratios in pp collisionsat √ s = 0.9, 2.76 and 7 TeV measured by ALICE”, Eur. Phys. J.
C73 (2013) , arXiv:1305.1562[nucl-ex] .[40]
ALICE
Collaboration, K. Aamodt et al., “Midrapidity antiproton-to-proton ratio in pp collisionsat √ s = . Phys. Rev. Lett. (2010) , arXiv:1006.5432 [hep-ex] .[41]
ALICE
Collaboration, J. Adam et al., “ Λ H and Λ H production in Pb-Pb collisions at √ s NN = Phys. Lett.
B754 (2016) , arXiv:1506.08453 [nucl-ex] .[42] S. T. Butler and C. A. Pearson, “Deuterons from High-Energy Proton Bombardment of Matter”,
Phys. Rev. (1963) .[43] R. Scheibl and U. W. Heinz, “Coalescence and flow in ultrarelativistic heavy ion collisions”,
Phys.Rev.
C59 (1999) , arXiv:nucl-th/9809092 [nucl-th] .[44]
GEANT4
Collaboration, S. Agostinelli et al., “G
EANT
4: A Simulation toolkit”,
Nucl. Instrum.Meth.
A506 (2003) .[45] V. Uzhinsky et al., “Antinucleus-nucleus cross sections implemented in G
EANT
Phys. Lett.
B705 (2011) .[46] V. F. Kuzichev, Yu. B. Lepikhin, and V. A. Smirnitsky, “The Anti-proton - nuclei annihilationcross-section at the momentum range from 0.70 GeV/ c to 2.5 GeV/ c ”, Nucl. Phys.
A576 (1994) .[47] A. Bianconi et al., “Measurement of the antiproton–nucleus annihilation cross section at 5.3MeV”,
Phys. Lett.
B704 (2011) .[48] P. Schwaller et al., “Proton total cross-sections on H, H, He, Be, C and O in the energy range180 MeV to 560 MeV”,
Nucl. Phys.
A316 (1979) .[49] W. Bauhoff, “Tables of reaction and total cross sections for proton-nucleus scattering below 1GeV”,
Atom. Data Nucl. Data Tabl. (1986) .10easurement of the low-energy antideuteron inelastic cross section ALICE Collaboration[50] B. M. Bobchenko et al., “Measurement of total inelastic cross-sections from proton interactionswith nuclei in the momentum rangefrom 5 GeV/ c to 9 GeV/ c and pi-mesons with nuclei in themomentum range from 1.75 GeV/ c to 6.5 GeV/ c ”, Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. (1979) . [Yad.Fiz.30,1553(1979)].[51] K. Nakamura et al., “Absorption and forward scattering of anti-protons by C, Al, and Cu nuclei inthe region 470 MeV/ c - 880 MeV/ c ”, Phys. Rev. Lett. (1984) .[52] V. Ashford et al., “Low-energy anti-proton nuclear absorption cross-sections”, Phys. Rev.
C31 (1985) .[53] A. Auce et al., “Reaction cross-sections for 38, 65, and 97 MeV deuterons on targets from Be to
Pb”,
Phys. Rev.
C53 (1996) .[54] J. Jaros et al., “Nucleus-nucleus total cross-sections for light nuclei at 1.55 GeV/ c /nucleon and2.89 GeV/ c /nucleon”, Phys. Rev.
C18 (1978) .[55] R. Duperray et al., “Flux of light antimatter nuclei near Earth, induced by cosmic rays in theGalaxy and in the atmosphere”,
Phys. Rev.
D71 (2005) , arXiv:astro-ph/0503544[astro-ph] . 11easurement of the low-energy antideuteron inelastic cross section ALICE Collaboration
A Supplemental material
Figure A.1:
Cumulative distribution of the material in the ALICE apparatus as a function of the radial distancefrom the beam line. The results are shown for straight primary tracks emitted perpendicularly to the beam lineeither at the center of the TOF sectors (red line) or averaged over azimuth (blue line). The cross section onthe beam-transverse plane of the different detector parts at the end cap is depicted with different colours in thebackground.
B The ALICE Collaboration
S. Acharya , D. Adamová , A. Adler , J. Adolfsson , M.M. Aggarwal , G. Aglieri Rinella ,M. Agnello , N. Agrawal
10 ,54 , Z. Ahammed , S. Ahmad , S.U. Ahn , Z. Akbar , A. Akindinov ,M. Al-Turany , S.N. Alam
40 ,141 , D.S.D. Albuquerque , D. Aleksandrov , B. Alessandro ,H.M. Alfanda , R. Alfaro Molina , B. Ali , Y. Ali , A. Alici
10 ,26 ,54 , N. Alizadehvandchali ,A. Alkin , J. Alme , T. Alt , L. Altenkamper , I. Altsybeev , M.N. Anaam , C. Andrei ,D. Andreou , A. Andronic , M. Angeletti , V. Anguelov , C. Anson , T. Antiˇci´c , F. Antinori ,P. Antonioli , N. Apadula , L. Aphecetche , H. Appelshäuser , S. Arcelli , R. Arnaldi , M. Arratia ,I.C. Arsene , M. Arslandok , A. Augustinus , R. Averbeck , S. Aziz , M.D. Azmi , A. Badalà ,Y.W. Baek , S. Bagnasco , X. Bai , R. Bailhache , R. Bala , A. Balbino , A. Baldisseri , M. Ball ,S. Balouza , D. Banerjee , R. Barbera , L. Barioglio , G.G. Barnaföldi , L.S. Barnby , V. Barret ,P. Bartalini , C. Bartels , K. Barth , E. Bartsch , F. Baruffaldi , N. Bastid , S. Basu , G. Batigne ,B. Batyunya , D. Bauri , J.L. Bazo Alba , I.G. Bearden , C. Beattie , C. Bedda , N.K. Behera ,I. Belikov , A.D.C. Bell Hechavarria , F. Bellini , R. Bellwied , V. Belyaev , G. Bencedi ,S. Beole , A. Bercuci , Y. Berdnikov , D. Berenyi , R.A. Bertens , D. Berzano , M.G. Besoiu ,L. Betev , A. Bhasin , I.R. Bhat , M.A. Bhat , H. Bhatt , B. Bhattacharjee , A. Bianchi ,L. Bianchi , N. Bianchi , J. Bielˇcík , J. Bielˇcíková , A. Bilandzic , G. Biro , R. Biswas , S. Biswas ,J.T. Blair , D. Blau , C. Blume , G. Boca , F. Bock , A. Bogdanov , S. Boi , J. Bok ,L. Boldizsár , A. Bolozdynya , M. Bombara , G. Bonomi , H. Borel , A. Borissov , H. Bossi ,E. Botta , L. Bratrud , P. Braun-Munzinger , M. Bregant , M. Broz , E. Bruna , G.E. Bruno
33 ,106 ,M.D. Buckland , D. Budnikov , H. Buesching , S. Bufalino , O. Bugnon , P. Buhler , P. Buncic ,Z. Buthelezi
72 ,131 , J.B. Butt , S.A. Bysiak , D. Caffarri , A. Caliva , E. Calvo Villar ,J.M.M. Camacho , R.S. Camacho , P. Camerini , F.D.M. Canedo , A.A. Capon , F. Carnesecchi ,R. Caron , J. Castillo Castellanos , A.J. Castro , E.A.R. Casula , F. Catalano , C. Ceballos Sanchez ,P. Chakraborty , S. Chandra , W. Chang , S. Chapeland , M. Chartier , S. Chattopadhyay ,S. Chattopadhyay , A. Chauvin , C. Cheshkov , B. Cheynis , V. Chibante Barroso ,D.D. Chinellato , S. Cho , P. Chochula , T. Chowdhury , P. Christakoglou , C.H. Christensen ,P. Christiansen , T. Chujo , C. Cicalo , L. Cifarelli
10 ,26 , L.D. Cilladi , F. Cindolo , M.R. Ciupek ,G. Clai
54 ,ii , J. Cleymans , F. Colamaria , D. Colella , A. Collu , M. Colocci , M. Concas
59 ,iii , G. ConesaBalbastre , Z. Conesa del Valle , G. Contin
24 ,60 , J.G. Contreras , T.M. Cormier , Y. Corrales Morales ,P. Cortese , M.R. Cosentino , F. Costa , S. Costanza , P. Crochet , E. Cuautle , P. Cui ,L. Cunqueiro , D. Dabrowski , T. Dahms , A. Dainese , F.P.A. Damas
115 ,137 , M.C. Danisch ,A. Danu , D. Das , I. Das , P. Das , P. Das , S. Das , A. Dash , S. Dash , S. De , A. De Caro ,G. de Cataldo , J. de Cuveland , A. De Falco , D. De Gruttola , N. De Marco , S. De Pasquale ,S. Deb , H.F. Degenhardt , K.R. Deja , A. Deloff , S. Delsanto
25 ,131 , W. Deng , P. Dhankher , D. DiBari , A. Di Mauro , R.A. Diaz , T. Dietel , P. Dillenseger , Y. Ding , R. Divià , D.U. Dixit ,Ø. Djuvsland , U. Dmitrieva , A. Dobrin , B. Dönigus , O. Dordic , A.K. Dubey , A. Dubla
90 ,107 ,S. Dudi , M. Dukhishyam , P. Dupieux , R.J. Ehlers , V.N. Eikeland , D. Elia , B. Erazmus ,F. Erhardt , A. Erokhin , M.R. Ersdal , B. Espagnon , G. Eulisse , D. Evans , S. Evdokimov ,L. Fabbietti , M. Faggin , J. Faivre , F. Fan , A. Fantoni , M. Fasel , P. Fecchio , A. Feliciello ,G. Feofilov , A. Fernández Téllez , A. Ferrero , A. Ferretti , A. Festanti , V.J.G. Feuillard ,J. Figiel , S. Filchagin , D. Finogeev , F.M. Fionda , G. Fiorenza , F. Flor , A.N. Flores ,S. Foertsch , P. Foka , S. Fokin , E. Fragiacomo , U. Frankenfeld , U. Fuchs , C. Furget , A. Furs ,M. Fusco Girard , J.J. Gaardhøje , M. Gagliardi , A.M. Gago , A. Gal , C.D. Galvan , P. Ganoti ,C. Garabatos , J.R.A. Garcia , E. Garcia-Solis , K. Garg , C. Gargiulo , A. Garibli , K. Garner ,P. Gasik
105 ,107 , E.F. Gauger , M.B. Gay Ducati , M. Germain , J. Ghosh , P. Ghosh , S.K. Ghosh ,M. Giacalone , P. Gianotti , P. Giubellino
59 ,107 , P. Giubilato , A.M.C. Glaenzer , P. Glässel , A. GomezRamirez , V. Gonzalez
107 ,143 , L.H. González-Trueba , S. Gorbunov , L. Görlich , A. Goswami ,S. Gotovac , V. Grabski , L.K. Graczykowski , K.L. Graham , L. Greiner , A. Grelli , C. Grigoras ,V. Grigoriev , A. Grigoryan , S. Grigoryan , O.S. Groettvik , F. Grosa
30 ,59 , J.F. Grosse-Oetringhaus ,R. Grosso , R. Guernane , M. Guittiere , K. Gulbrandsen , T. Gunji , A. Gupta , R. Gupta ,I.B. Guzman , R. Haake , M.K. Habib , C. Hadjidakis , H. Hamagaki , G. Hamar , M. Hamid ,R. Hannigan , M.R. Haque
63 ,86 , A. Harlenderova , J.W. Harris , A. Harton , J.A. Hasenbichler ,H. Hassan , Q.U. Hassan , D. Hatzifotiadou
10 ,54 , P. Hauer , L.B. Havener , S. Hayashi ,S.T. Heckel , E. Hellbär , H. Helstrup , A. Herghelegiu , T. Herman , E.G. Hernandez , G. HerreraCorral , F. Herrmann , K.F. Hetland , H. Hillemanns , C. Hills , B. Hippolyte , B. Hohlweger , J. Honermann , D. Horak , A. Hornung , S. Hornung , R. Hosokawa
15 ,133 , P. Hristov , C. Huang ,C. Hughes , P. Huhn , T.J. Humanic , H. Hushnud , L.A. Husova , N. Hussain , S.A. Hussain ,D. Hutter , J.P. Iddon
34 ,127 , R. Ilkaev , H. Ilyas , M. Inaba , G.M. Innocenti , M. Ippolitov ,A. Isakov , M.S. Islam , M. Ivanov , V. Ivanov , V. Izucheev , B. Jacak , N. Jacazio
34 ,54 ,P.M. Jacobs , S. Jadlovska , J. Jadlovsky , S. Jaelani , C. Jahnke , M.J. Jakubowska ,M.A. Janik , T. Janson , M. Jercic , O. Jevons , M. Jin , F. Jonas
96 ,144 , P.G. Jones , J. Jung ,M. Jung , A. Jusko , P. Kalinak , A. Kalweit , V. Kaplin , S. Kar , A. Karasu Uysal , D. Karatovic ,O. Karavichev , T. Karavicheva , P. Karczmarczyk , E. Karpechev , A. Kazantsev , U. Kebschull ,R. Keidel , M. Keil , B. Ketzer , Z. Khabanova , A.M. Khan , S. Khan , A. Khanzadeev ,Y. Kharlov , A. Khatun , A. Khuntia , B. Kileng , B. Kim , B. Kim , D. Kim , D.J. Kim ,E.J. Kim , H. Kim , J. Kim , J.S. Kim , J. Kim , J. Kim , J. Kim , M. Kim , S. Kim ,T. Kim , T. Kim , S. Kirsch , I. Kisel , S. Kiselev , A. Kisiel , J.L. Klay , C. Klein , J. Klein
34 ,59 ,S. Klein , C. Klein-Bösing , M. Kleiner , A. Kluge , M.L. Knichel , A.G. Knospe , C. Kobdaj ,M.K. Köhler , T. Kollegger , A. Kondratyev , N. Kondratyeva , E. Kondratyuk , J. Konig ,S.A. Konigstorfer , P.J. Konopka , G. Kornakov , L. Koska , O. Kovalenko , V. Kovalenko ,M. Kowalski , I. Králik , A. Kravˇcáková , L. Kreis , M. Krivda
64 ,111 , F. Krizek ,K. Krizkova Gajdosova , M. Krüger , E. Kryshen , M. Krzewicki , A.M. Kubera , V. Kuˇcera
34 ,61 ,C. Kuhn , P.G. Kuijer , L. Kumar , S. Kundu , P. Kurashvili , A. Kurepin , A.B. Kurepin ,A. Kuryakin , S. Kushpil , J. Kvapil , M.J. Kweon , J.Y. Kwon , Y. Kwon , S.L. La Pointe , P. LaRocca , Y.S. Lai , M. Lamanna , R. Langoy , K. Lapidus , A. Lardeux , P. Larionov , E. Laudi ,R. Lavicka , T. Lazareva , R. Lea , L. Leardini , J. Lee , S. Lee , S. Lehner , J. Lehrbach ,R.C. Lemmon , I. León Monzón , E.D. Lesser , M. Lettrich , P. Lévai , X. Li , X.L. Li , J. Lien ,R. Lietava , B. Lim , V. Lindenstruth , A. Lindner , C. Lippmann , M.A. Lisa , A. Liu , J. Liu ,S. Liu , W.J. Llope , I.M. Lofnes , V. Loginov , C. Loizides , P. Loncar , J.A. Lopez , X. Lopez ,E. López Torres , J.R. Luhder , M. Lunardon , G. Luparello , Y.G. Ma , A. Maevskaya , M. Mager ,S.M. Mahmood , T. Mahmoud , A. Maire , R.D. Majka
146 ,i , M. Malaev , Q.W. Malik , L. Malinina
75 ,iv ,D. Mal’Kevich , P. Malzacher , G. Mandaglio
32 ,56 , V. Manko , F. Manso , V. Manzari , Y. Mao ,M. Marchisone , J. Mareš , G.V. Margagliotti , A. Margotti , A. Marín , C. Markert ,M. Marquard , C.D. Martin , N.A. Martin , P. Martinengo , J.L. Martinez , M.I. Martínez ,G. Martínez García , S. Masciocchi , M. Masera , A. Masoni , L. Massacrier , E. Masson ,A. Mastroserio
53 ,138 , A.M. Mathis , O. Matonoha , P.F.T. Matuoka , A. Matyja , C. Mayer ,F. Mazzaschi , M. Mazzilli , M.A. Mazzoni , A.F. Mechler , F. Meddi , Y. Melikyan
62 ,93 ,A. Menchaca-Rocha , C. Mengke , E. Meninno
29 ,114 , A.S. Menon , M. Meres , S. Mhlanga ,Y. Miake , L. Micheletti , L.C. Migliorin , D.L. Mihaylov , K. Mikhaylov
75 ,92 , A.N. Mishra ,D. Mi´skowiec , A. Modak , N. Mohammadi , A.P. Mohanty , B. Mohanty , M. Mohisin Khan
16 ,v ,Z. Moravcova , C. Mordasini , D.A. Moreira De Godoy , L.A.P. Moreno , I. Morozov , A. Morsch ,T. Mrnjavac , V. Muccifora , E. Mudnic , D. Mühlheim , S. Muhuri , J.D. Mulligan , A. Mulliri
23 ,55 ,M.G. Munhoz , R.H. Munzer , H. Murakami , S. Murray , L. Musa , J. Musinsky , C.J. Myers ,J.W. Myrcha , B. Naik , R. Nair , B.K. Nandi , R. Nania
10 ,54 , E. Nappi , M.U. Naru ,A.F. Nassirpour , C. Nattrass , R. Nayak , T.K. Nayak , S. Nazarenko , A. Neagu , R.A. Negrao DeOliveira , L. Nellen , S.V. Nesbo , G. Neskovic , D. Nesterov , L.T. Neumann , B.S. Nielsen ,S. Nikolaev , S. Nikulin , V. Nikulin , F. Noferini
10 ,54 , P. Nomokonov , J. Norman
79 ,127 , N. Novitzky ,P. Nowakowski , A. Nyanin , J. Nystrand , M. Ogino , A. Ohlson
81 ,104 , J. Oleniacz , A.C. Oliveira DaSilva , M.H. Oliver , C. Oppedisano , A. Ortiz Velasquez , A. Oskarsson , J. Otwinowski ,K. Oyama , Y. Pachmayer , V. Pacik , S. Padhan , D. Pagano , G. Pai´c , J. Pan , S. Panebianco ,P. Pareek
50 ,141 , J. Park , J.E. Parkkila , S. Parmar , S.P. Pathak , B. Paul , J. Pazzini , H. Pei ,T. Peitzmann , X. Peng , L.G. Pereira , H. Pereira Da Costa , D. Peresunko , G.M. Perez , S. Perrin ,Y. Pestov , V. Petráˇcek , M. Petrovici , R.P. Pezzi , S. Piano , M. Pikna , P. Pillot , O. Pinazza
34 ,54 ,L. Pinsky , C. Pinto , S. Pisano
10 ,52 , D. Pistone , M. Płosko´n , M. Planinic , F. Pliquett ,M.G. Poghosyan , B. Polichtchouk , N. Poljak , A. Pop , S. Porteboeuf-Houssais , V. Pozdniakov ,S.K. Prasad , R. Preghenella , F. Prino , C.A. Pruneau , I. Pshenichnov , M. Puccio , J. Putschke ,S. Qiu , L. Quaglia , R.E. Quishpe , S. Ragoni , S. Raha , S. Rajput , J. Rak ,A. Rakotozafindrabe , L. Ramello , F. Rami , S.A.R. Ramirez , R. Raniwala , S. Raniwala ,S.S. Räsänen , R. Rath , V. Ratza , I. Ravasenga , K.F. Read
96 ,130 , A.R. Redelbach , K. Redlich
85 ,vi ,A. Rehman , P. Reichelt , F. Reidt , X. Ren , R. Renfordt , Z. Rescakova , K. Reygers , A. Riabov ,V. Riabov , T. Richert
81 ,89 , M. Richter , P. Riedler , W. Riegler , F. Riggi , C. Ristea , S.P. Rode , M. Rodríguez Cahuantzi , K. Røed , R. Rogalev , E. Rogochaya , D. Rohr , D. Röhrich , P.F. Rojas ,P.S. Rokita , F. Ronchetti , A. Rosano , E.D. Rosas , K. Roslon , A. Rossi
28 ,57 , A. Rotondi ,A. Roy , P. Roy , O.V. Rueda , R. Rui , B. Rumyantsev , A. Rustamov , E. Ryabinkin , Y. Ryabov ,A. Rybicki , H. Rytkonen , O.A.M. Saarimaki , R. Sadek , S. Sadhu , S. Sadovsky , K. Šafaˇrík ,S.K. Saha , B. Sahoo , P. Sahoo , R. Sahoo , S. Sahoo , P.K. Sahu , J. Saini , S. Sakai ,S. Sambyal , V. Samsonov
93 ,98 , D. Sarkar , N. Sarkar , P. Sarma , V.M. Sarti , M.H.P. Sas ,E. Scapparone , J. Schambach , H.S. Scheid , C. Schiaua , R. Schicker , A. Schmah , C. Schmidt ,H.R. Schmidt , M.O. Schmidt , M. Schmidt , N.V. Schmidt
68 ,96 , A.R. Schmier , J. Schukraft ,Y. Schutz , K. Schwarz , K. Schweda , G. Scioli , E. Scomparin , J.E. Seger , Y. Sekiguchi ,D. Sekihata , I. Selyuzhenkov
93 ,107 , S. Senyukov , D. Serebryakov , A. Sevcenco , A. Shabanov ,A. Shabetai , R. Shahoyan , W. Shaikh , A. Shangaraev , A. Sharma , A. Sharma , H. Sharma ,M. Sharma , N. Sharma , S. Sharma , O. Sheibani , K. Shigaki , M. Shimomura , S. Shirinkin ,Q. Shou , Y. Sibiriak , S. Siddhanta , T. Siemiarczuk , D. Silvermyr , G. Simatovic , G. Simonetti ,B. Singh , R. Singh , R. Singh , R. Singh , V.K. Singh , V. Singhal , T. Sinha , B. Sitar ,M. Sitta , T.B. Skaali , M. Slupecki , N. Smirnov , R.J.M. Snellings , C. Soncco , J. Song ,A. Songmoolnak , F. Soramel , S. Sorensen , I. Sputowska , J. Stachel , I. Stan , P.J. Steffanic ,E. Stenlund , S.F. Stiefelmaier , D. Stocco , M.M. Storetvedt , L.D. Stritto , A.A.P. Suaide ,T. Sugitate , C. Suire , M. Suleymanov , M. Suljic , R. Sultanov , M. Šumbera , V. Sumberia ,S. Sumowidagdo , S. Swain , A. Szabo , I. Szarka , U. Tabassam , S.F. Taghavi , G. Taillepied ,J. Takahashi , G.J. Tambave , S. Tang , M. Tarhini , M.G. Tarzila , A. Tauro , G. Tejeda Muñoz ,A. Telesca , L. Terlizzi , C. Terrevoli , D. Thakur , S. Thakur , D. Thomas , F. Thoresen ,R. Tieulent , A. Tikhonov , A.R. Timmins , A. Toia , N. Topilskaya , M. Toppi , F. Torales-Acosta ,S.R. Torres , A. Trifiró
32 ,56 , S. Tripathy
50 ,69 , T. Tripathy , S. Trogolo , G. Trombetta , L. Tropp ,V. Trubnikov , W.H. Trzaska , T.P. Trzcinski , B.A. Trzeciak
37 ,63 , A. Tumkin , R. Turrisi ,T.S. Tveter , K. Ullaland , E.N. Umaka , A. Uras , G.L. Usai , M. Vala , N. Valle , S. Vallero ,N. van der Kolk , L.V.R. van Doremalen , M. van Leeuwen , P. Vande Vyvre , D. Varga , Z. Varga ,M. Varga-Kofarago , A. Vargas , M. Vasileiou , A. Vasiliev , O. Vázquez Doce , V. Vechernin ,E. Vercellin , S. Vergara Limón , L. Vermunt , R. Vernet , R. Vértesi , L. Vickovic , Z. Vilakazi ,O. Villalobos Baillie , G. Vino , A. Vinogradov , T. Virgili , V. Vislavicius , A. Vodopyanov ,B. Volkel , M.A. Völkl , K. Voloshin , S.A. Voloshin , G. Volpe , B. von Haller , I. Vorobyev ,D. Voscek , J. Vrláková , B. Wagner , M. Weber , S.G. Weber , A. Wegrzynek , S.C. Wenzel ,J.P. Wessels , J. Wiechula , J. Wikne , G. Wilk , J. Wilkinson
10 ,54 , G.A. Willems , E. Willsher ,B. Windelband , M. Winn , W.E. Witt , J.R. Wright , Y. Wu , R. Xu , S. Yalcin , Y. Yamaguchi ,K. Yamakawa , S. Yang , S. Yano , Z. Yin , H. Yokoyama , I.-K. Yoo , J.H. Yoon , S. Yuan ,A. Yuncu , V. Yurchenko , V. Zaccolo , A. Zaman , C. Zampolli , H.J.C. Zanoli , N. Zardoshti ,A. Zarochentsev , P. Závada , N. Zaviyalov , H. Zbroszczyk , M. Zhalov , S. Zhang , X. Zhang ,Z. Zhang , V. Zherebchevskii , Y. Zhi , D. Zhou , Y. Zhou , Z. Zhou , J. Zhu , Y. Zhu ,A. Zichichi
10 ,26 , G. Zinovjev , N. Zurlo , Affiliation notes i Deceased ii Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (ENEA),Bologna, Italy iii
Dipartimento DET del Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy iv M.V. Lomonosov Moscow State University, D.V. Skobeltsyn Institute of Nuclear, Physics, Moscow, Russia v Department of Applied Physics, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India vi Institute of Theoretical Physics, University of Wroclaw, Poland
Collaboration Institutes A.I. Alikhanyan National Science Laboratory (Yerevan Physics Institute) Foundation, Yerevan, Armenia Bogolyubov Institute for Theoretical Physics, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kiev, Ukraine Bose Institute, Department of Physics and Centre for Astroparticle Physics and Space Science (CAPSS),Kolkata, India Budker Institute for Nuclear Physics, Novosibirsk, Russia California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California, United States Central China Normal University, Wuhan, China Centre de Calcul de l’IN2P3, Villeurbanne, Lyon, France Centro de Aplicaciones Tecnológicas y Desarrollo Nuclear (CEADEN), Havana, Cuba Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados (CINVESTAV), Mexico City and Mérida, Mexico Centro Fermi - Museo Storico della Fisica e Centro Studi e Ricerche “Enrico Fermi’, Rome, Italy Chicago State University, Chicago, Illinois, United States China Institute of Atomic Energy, Beijing, China Comenius University Bratislava, Faculty of Mathematics, Physics and Informatics, Bratislava, Slovakia COMSATS University Islamabad, Islamabad, Pakistan Creighton University, Omaha, Nebraska, United States Department of Physics, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India Department of Physics, Pusan National University, Pusan, Republic of Korea Department of Physics, Sejong University, Seoul, Republic of Korea Department of Physics, University of California, Berkeley, California, United States Department of Physics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway Dipartimento di Fisica dell’Università ’La Sapienza’ and Sezione INFN, Rome, Italy Dipartimento di Fisica dell’Università and Sezione INFN, Cagliari, Italy Dipartimento di Fisica dell’Università and Sezione INFN, Trieste, Italy Dipartimento di Fisica dell’Università and Sezione INFN, Turin, Italy Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia dell’Università and Sezione INFN, Bologna, Italy Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia dell’Università and Sezione INFN, Catania, Italy Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia dell’Università and Sezione INFN, Padova, Italy Dipartimento di Fisica ‘E.R. Caianiello’ dell’Università and Gruppo Collegato INFN, Salerno, Italy Dipartimento DISAT del Politecnico and Sezione INFN, Turin, Italy Dipartimento di Scienze e Innovazione Tecnologica dell’Università del Piemonte Orientale and INFNSezione di Torino, Alessandria, Italy Dipartimento di Scienze MIFT, Università di Messina, Messina, Italy Dipartimento Interateneo di Fisica ‘M. Merlin’ and Sezione INFN, Bari, Italy European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture, University of Split,Split, Croatia Faculty of Engineering and Science, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway Faculty of Nuclear Sciences and Physical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague,Czech Republic Faculty of Science, P.J. Šafárik University, Košice, Slovakia Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt, Frankfurt,Germany Fudan University, Shanghai, China Gangneung-Wonju National University, Gangneung, Republic of Korea Gauhati University, Department of Physics, Guwahati, India Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen- und Kernphysik, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn, Bonn,Germany Helsinki Institute of Physics (HIP), Helsinki, Finland High Energy Physics Group, Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, Puebla, Mexico Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan Hochschule Worms, Zentrum für Technologietransfer und Telekommunikation (ZTT), Worms, Germany Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania Indian Institute of Technology Bombay (IIT), Mumbai, India Indian Institute of Technology Indore, Indore, India Indonesian Institute of Sciences, Jakarta, Indonesia INFN, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy INFN, Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy INFN, Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy INFN, Sezione di Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy INFN, Sezione di Catania, Catania, Italy INFN, Sezione di Padova, Padova, Italy INFN, Sezione di Roma, Rome, Italy INFN, Sezione di Torino, Turin, Italy INFN, Sezione di Trieste, Trieste, Italy Inha University, Incheon, Republic of Korea Institute for Nuclear Research, Academy of Sciences, Moscow, Russia Institute for Subatomic Physics, Utrecht University/Nikhef, Utrecht, Netherlands Institute of Experimental Physics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Košice, Slovakia Institute of Physics, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Bhubaneswar, India Institute of Physics of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic Institute of Space Science (ISS), Bucharest, Romania Institut für Kernphysik, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany Instituto de Ciencias Nucleares, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City, Mexico Instituto de Física, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, Brazil Instituto de Física, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City, Mexico iThemba LABS, National Research Foundation, Somerset West, South Africa Jeonbuk National University, Jeonju, Republic of Korea Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe Universität Frankfurt Institut für Informatik, Fachbereich Informatik undMathematik, Frankfurt, Germany Joint Institute for Nuclear Research (JINR), Dubna, Russia Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information, Daejeon, Republic of Korea KTO Karatay University, Konya, Turkey Laboratoire de Physique des 2 Infinis, Irène Joliot-Curie, Orsay, France Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et de Cosmologie, Université Grenoble-Alpes, CNRS-IN2P3,Grenoble, France Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California, United States Lund University Department of Physics, Division of Particle Physics, Lund, Sweden Nagasaki Institute of Applied Science, Nagasaki, Japan Nara Women’s University (NWU), Nara, Japan National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Science, Department of Physics , Athens,Greece National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw, Poland National Institute of Science Education and Research, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Jatni, India National Nuclear Research Center, Baku, Azerbaijan National Research Centre Kurchatov Institute, Moscow, Russia Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark Nikhef, National institute for subatomic physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands NRC Kurchatov Institute IHEP, Protvino, Russia NRC «Kurchatov Institute» - ITEP, Moscow, Russia NRNU Moscow Engineering Physics Institute, Moscow, Russia Nuclear Physics Group, STFC Daresbury Laboratory, Daresbury, United Kingdom Nuclear Physics Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences, ˇRež u Prahy, Czech Republic Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, United States Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States Petersburg Nuclear Physics Institute, Gatchina, Russia Physics department, Faculty of science, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia
Physics Department, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India
Physics Department, University of Jammu, Jammu, India
Physics Department, University of Rajasthan, Jaipur, India
Physikalisches Institut, Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany
Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany
Physik Department, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany
Politecnico di Bari, Bari, Italy
Research Division and ExtreMe Matter Institute EMMI, GSI Helmholtzzentrum fürSchwerionenforschung GmbH, Darmstadt, Germany
Rudjer Boškovi´c Institute, Zagreb, Croatia
Russian Federal Nuclear Center (VNIIEF), Sarov, Russia
Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Kolkata, India
School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom
Sección Física, Departamento de Ciencias, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima, Peru
St. Petersburg State University, St. Petersburg, Russia
Stefan Meyer Institut für Subatomare Physik (SMI), Vienna, Austria
SUBATECH, IMT Atlantique, Université de Nantes, CNRS-IN2P3, Nantes, France
Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand
Technical University of Košice, Košice, Slovakia
The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, Poland
The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States
Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa, Culiacán, Mexico
Universidade de São Paulo (USP), São Paulo, Brazil
Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, Brazil
Universidade Federal do ABC, Santo Andre, Brazil
University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa
University of Houston, Houston, Texas, United States
University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland
University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom
University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China
University of South-Eastern Norway, Tonsberg, Norway
University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, United States
University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa
University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan
University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan
Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France
Université de Lyon, Université Lyon 1, CNRS/IN2P3, IPN-Lyon, Villeurbanne, Lyon, France
Université de Strasbourg, CNRS, IPHC UMR 7178, F-67000 Strasbourg, France, Strasbourg, France
Université Paris-Saclay Centre d’Etudes de Saclay (CEA), IRFU, Départment de Physique Nucléaire(DPhN), Saclay, France
Università degli Studi di Foggia, Foggia, Italy
Università degli Studi di Pavia, Pavia, Italy
Università di Brescia, Brescia, Italy
Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Kolkata, India
Warsaw University of Technology, Warsaw, Poland
Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, United States
Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, Institut für Kernphysik, Münster, Germany
Wigner Research Centre for Physics, Budapest, Hungary
Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, United States