<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Measurements of long-range two-particle correlation over a wide pseudorapidity range in p–Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 5.0$ TeV

Shreyasi Acharya, Dagmar Adamova, Gianluca Aglieri Rinella, Michelangelo Agnello, Neelima Agrawal, Zubayer Ahammed, Shakeel Ahmad, Sang Un Ahn, Ishaan Ahuja, Alexander Akindinov, et al.

► To cite this version:

Shreyasi Acharya, Dagmar Adamova, Gianluca Aglieri Rinella, Michelangelo Agnello, Neelima Agrawal, et al. Measurements of long-range two-particle correlation over a wide pseudorapidity range in p–Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 5.0$ TeV. Journal of High Energy Physics, 2024, 01, pp.199. 10.1007/JHEP01(2024)199. hal-04210137

HAL Id: hal-04210137

https://hal.science/hal-04210137v1

Submitted on 4 Jun 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access archive for the deposit and dissemination of scientific research documents, whether they are published or not. The documents may come from teaching and research institutions in France or abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>
RECEIVED: October 26, 2023

ACCEPTED: December 16, 2023

PUBLISHED: January 31, 2024

# Measurements of long-range two-particle correlation over a wide pseudorapidity range in p-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV

<figure><img src="image_3.png" /></figure>

## The ALICE collaboration

E-mail: **alice-publications@cern.ch**

**ABSTRACT:** Correlations in azimuthal angle extending over a long range in pseudorapidity between particles, usually called the “ridge” phenomenon, were discovered in heavy-ion collisions, and later found in pp and p-Pb collisions. In large systems, they are thought to arise from the expansion (collective flow) of the produced particles. Extending these measurements over a wider range in pseudorapidity and final-state particle multiplicity is important to understand better the origin of these long-range correlations in small collision systems. In this Letter, measurements of the long-range correlations in p-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV are extended to a pseudorapidity gap of $\Delta\eta \sim 8$ between particles using the ALICE forward multiplicity detectors. After suppressing non-flow correlations, e.g., from jet and resonance decays, the ridge structure is observed to persist up to a very large gap of $\Delta\eta \sim 8$ for the first time in p-Pb collisions. This shows that the collective flow-like correlations extend over an extensive pseudorapidity range also in small collision systems such as p-Pb collisions. The pseudorapidity dependence of the second-order anisotropic flow coefficient, $v_2(\eta)$, is extracted from the long-range correlations. The $v_2(\eta)$ results are presented for a wide pseudorapidity range of $-3.1 < \eta < 4.8$ in various centrality classes in p-Pb collisions. To gain a comprehensive understanding of the source of anisotropic flow in small collision systems, the $v_2(\eta)$ measurements are compared with hydrodynamic and transport model calculations. The comparison suggests that the final-state interactions play a dominant role in developing the anisotropic flow in small collision systems.

**KEYWORDS:** Collective Flow, Heavy Ion Experiments, Particle Correlations and Fluctuations

**ARXIV ePRINT:** 2308.16590
# Contents

<table><tr><td>1</td><td>Introduction</td><td>1</td></tr><tr><td>2</td><td>Experimental setup</td><td>2</td></tr><tr><td>3</td><td>Data analysis</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>3.1</td><td>Event and track selection</td><td>3</td></tr><tr><td>3.2</td><td>Two-particle correlation and extraction of v<sub>2</sub>(η)</td><td>4</td></tr><tr><td>3.3</td><td>Systematic uncertainties</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>4</td><td>Results</td><td>7</td></tr><tr><td>5</td><td>Summary</td><td>12</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">A Non-flow subtraction with the improved-template-fit method and peripheral subtraction procedure</td><td>13</td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">The ALICE collaboration</td><td>22</td></tr></table>

## 1 Introduction

High-energy heavy-ion collisions can produce a deconfined state of quarks and gluons, the so-called quark-gluon plasma (QGP). Measurements of azimuthal anisotropic flow, for example, via long-range two-particle correlations, are sensitive to key properties of the QGP [1]. The two-particle correlations between an associated particle and a trigger particle are commonly measured as a function of the differences in pseudorapidity ($\Delta\eta = \eta_{\text{trig}} - \eta_{\text{asso}}$) and azimuthal angle ($\Delta\varphi = \varphi_{\text{trig}} - \varphi_{\text{asso}}$). Striking correlations over a long range in $\Delta\eta$ on the near side ($\Delta\varphi \sim 0$), the so-called “ridge”, have been observed in heavy-ion collisions [2–11], where they are well understood as a consequence of strong, final-state interactions in the dense system created in heavy-ion collisions and the resulting fluid-like collective expansion of the matter created. The correlation function, associate yield as a function of differences in pseudorapidity and azimuthal angle, projected onto the $\Delta\varphi$ direction, can be expressed in terms of a Fourier series,

$$ \frac{dN_{\text{pair}}}{d\Delta\varphi} \propto 1 + \sum_{n=1}^{\infty} 2v_n^2 \cos(n\Delta\varphi), \qquad (1.1) $$

where $v_n$ is the Fourier coefficient of n-th flow harmonics. The $v_n$ coefficients emerge due to the anisotropic hydrodynamic expansion of the medium and fluctuate along with the collision geometry in heavy-ion collisions. The $v_n$ coefficients and their multiplicity and transverse-momentum ($p_T$) dependence are well described by relativistic hydrodynamic models at midrapidity [12, 13]. The pseudorapidity dependence of $v_n$ coefficients is sensitive to a temperature dependence of the shear viscosity to entropy density ratio $\eta/s$ of the QGP [14–16].
It has been measured over a large pseudorapidity region ($|η| < 5$) in Au-Au and Pb-Pb collisions at RHIC [17] and the LHC [18]. In small collision systems, such as pp and p-Pb collisions, a “ridge” structure was also observed similar to heavy-ion collisions [19–31]. The $p_T$ dependence of $v_2$ coefficients in small collision systems, which shows a characteristic mass dependence at low $p_T$, is found to be similar to heavy-ion collisions [27, 29, 31, 32]. Both hydrodynamic (macroscopic) and kinetic transport (microscopic) models can describe collective-flow observables fairly well in small systems as well as in heavy-ion collisions [33–38]. However, the underlying physics of the observed anisotropic flow in small collision systems is still under debate. One possible scenario predicts that both contributions from a momentum anisotropy arising in the initial state as well as final interactions are essential in small collision systems [39–41]. Furthermore, the relative contributions of soft collective processes, concentrated in the dense “core” and modeled with hydrodynamics, and of hard processes such as hard scattering and jet fragmentation (described as a pp-like “corona”) are also not well understood. The charged-particle pseudorapidity distribution is asymmetric in p-Pb collisions [42]: the multiplicity is larger in the Pb-going direction compared to the p-going direction. Since the mean free path depends on the charged-particle multiplicity, the pseudorapidity dependence of $v_2$ reflects the underlying dynamical evolution in p-Pb collisions and is a direct indicator of how local particle densities modulate the collective flow. CMS results on $v_2(η)$ in p-Pb collisions at the LHC [43, 44] show a significant pseudorapidity dependence, beyond what would be expected from the pseudorapidity dependence of the mean $p_T$. However, the acceptance is limited to midrapidity $|η| < 2$. Various small asymmetric collision systems were used to extract $v_2(η)$ at RHIC by means of the event plane method. The measurements were carried out within the pseudorapidity range of $|η| < 3$ [45, 46]. A hydrodynamic model [47] describes the result of $v_2(η)$ qualitatively except for the pseudorapidity regions ($-3 < η < -2$) in p-Au collisions, where non-flow effects appear to be significant because the rapidity gap from the detector that determines the event plane is small.

In this Letter, the measurements of long-range two-particle correlations and $v_2(η)$ in p-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 5.02$ TeV with the ALICE detector at the LHC are presented. These measurements utilize the Forward Multiplicity Detector (FMD) to extract $v_2(η)$ over the unprecedented range of about 8 units of pseudorapidity ($-3.1 < η < 4.8$). The results are compared with a hydrodynamic-model calculation and the AMPT transport model.

## 2 Experimental setup

A comprehensive description of the ALICE detector can be found in refs. [48, 49]. The main detectors used in this analysis are the Forward Multiplicity Detector (FMD), the Inner Tracking System (ITS), and the Time Projection Chamber (TPC). The FMD is a silicon strip detector that measures charged particles with a fine granularity of $\Delta\varphi = \pi/20$ and $\Delta\eta = 0.05$. The FMD comprises three sub-detectors: FMD1, FMD2, and FMD3. The combined acceptance of FMD1 and FMD2 is $1.7 < η < 5.1$. The pseudorapidity coverage of FMD3 is $-3.4 < η < -1.7$. FMD1 and FMD3 consist of an inner and an outer ring, and FMD2 consists of only one ring, all placed around the beam pipe. The inner and outer rings are divided into 20 and 40 sectors in the azimuthal direction, respectively, and each ring is composed of hexagonal silicon sensors. Each inner and outer ring is segmented into 512 and
256 strips in the radial direction, respectively. Charged-particle tracking at midrapidity is provided using the TPC and ITS, both covering the full azimuthal angle and $|η| < 0.8$. They are placed inside the L3 solenoid magnet, which provides a magnetic field of $B = 0.5$ T along the beam direction. The vertex detector, ITS, consists of six layers of silicon detectors; two layers each are equipped with the Silicon Pixel Detector (SPD), the Silicon Drift Detector (SDD), and the Silicon Strip Detector (SSD). The TPC provides track reconstruction using up to 159 space points along a charged-particle trajectory and particle identification via the measurement of specific energy loss $dE/dx$. The V0 is used for event triggering and centrality determination. It is composed of two arrays of 32 scintillator tiles each and covers $-3.7 < η < -1.7$ (V0C) and $2.8 < η < 5.1$ (V0A). In addition, two neutron Zero Degree Calorimeters (ZDCs) located at 112.5 m (ZNA) and $-112.5$ m (ZNC) from the interaction point along the beam direction are used for the event selection.

# 3 Data analysis

## 3.1 Event and track selection

This analysis uses ALICE data taken for p-Pb collisions at a centre-of-mass energy per nucleon pair of $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 5.02$ TeV provided by the LHC in 2016, corresponding to a proton beam energy of 4 TeV and a lead beam energy of 1.58 TeV per nucleon. Due to the asymmetric collision system, the nucleon-nucleon centre-of-mass system was shifted by 0.465 rapidity units in the proton beam direction with respect to the ALICE laboratory system. In this Letter, $η$ denotes the pseudorapidity in the laboratory system, and the positive pseudorapidity points in the Pb-going direction.

This analysis uses $5 \times 10^8$ events acquired using a minimum bias trigger. The minimum bias trigger requires the in-time coincidence of signals from V0A and V0C. The first step of the event selection is performed on the amplitude and timing in the V0 and ZDC as described in ref. [50]. The efficiency of the event selection is 99.2% for non-single-diffractive collisions. The primary vertex position is determined with reconstructed tracks in the TPC and ITS by using an analytic $\chi^2$ minimization method as described in ref. [51]. The primary vertex in the beam axis is required to be within 10 cm of the nominal interaction point along the beam line. In addition, pile-up events from beam-induced background are rejected by using correlations between the FMD and V0 multiplicities.

Charged-particle tracks are reconstructed in the ITS and TPC within $|η| < 0.8$ for $p_T > 0.2$ GeV/c as follows. First, the tracks are selected on the number of space points and the quality of the track fit in the TPC. In addition, the tracks are required to have a distance of closest approach (DCA) to the reconstructed primary vertices less than 2 cm in the beam-axis direction. The DCA in the transverse direction is required to be less than 7 $\sigma_{DCA}$, where $\sigma_{DCA}$ is a $p_T$-dependent transverse impact parameter resolution. The efficiency of the charged-particle track selection is estimated with a Monte Carlo (MC) simulation using the DPMJET event generator [52] and GEANT3 [53] to simulate particle transport through the detector. The efficiency is about 65% at $p_T=0.2$ GeV/c, increases to about 79% at $p_T =0.8$ GeV/c, and decreases to about 76% at $p_T =3$ GeV/c.
<table><caption>**Table 1.** Average charged-particle pseudorapidity density for $p_T > 0$ GeV/c in different pseudorapidity regions.</caption><thead><tr><th>Centrality</th><th>⟨dN<sub>ch</sub>/dη⟩<sub>-3.25&lt;η&lt;-2.5</sub></th><th>⟨dN<sub>ch</sub>/dη⟩<sub>|η|&lt;0.8</sub></th><th>⟨dN<sub>ch</sub>/dη⟩<sub>2&lt;η&lt;3.75</sub></th><th>⟨dN<sub>ch</sub>/dη⟩<sub>3.75&lt;η&lt;5</sub></th></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>0-5%</td><td>34 ± 2.2</td><td>45 ± 1.4</td><td>60 ± 3.8</td><td>52 ± 3.5</td></tr><tr><td>5-10%</td><td>29 ± 1.9</td><td>36 ± 1.1</td><td>46 ± 2.9</td><td>39 ± 2.6</td></tr><tr><td>10-20%</td><td>26 ± 1.6</td><td>31 ± 0.94</td><td>37 ± 2.4</td><td>31 ± 2.1</td></tr><tr><td>20-40%</td><td>21 ± 1.4</td><td>23 ± 0.72</td><td>27 ± 1.7</td><td>22 ± 1.5</td></tr><tr><td>40-60%</td><td>16 ± 1.0</td><td>16 ± 0.54</td><td>17 ± 1.1</td><td>14 ± 0.95</td></tr><tr><td>60-80%</td><td>11 ± 0.68</td><td>9.7 ± 0.33</td><td>9.9 ± 0.63</td><td>7.8 ± 0.52</td></tr><tr><td>80-100%</td><td>5.4 ± 0.34</td><td>4.2 ± 0.14</td><td>3.5 ± 0.22</td><td>2.7 ± 0.18</td></tr></tbody></table>

The selected events are divided into several centrality classes based on the V0A amplitude. Table 1 shows the event classes and corresponding average charged-particle pseudorapidity densities within $-3.25 < \eta < -2.5$, $|\eta| < 0.8$, $2 < \eta < 3.75$, and $3.75 < \eta < 5$. The multiplicities were measured by the innermost two layers of the ITS at midrapidity and the FMD at forward and backward rapidity [42].

## 3.2 Two-particle correlation and extraction of $v_2(\eta)$

For a given event class, two-particle correlations between a trigger and associated particle are measured as a function of the pseudorapidity difference $\Delta\eta$ and the azimuthal angle difference $\Delta\varphi$. The associated yield to a trigger particle as a function of $\Delta\eta$ and $\Delta\varphi$ is defined as

$$ \frac{1}{N_{\text{trig}}} \frac{\mathrm{d}^2 N_{\text{assoc}}}{\mathrm{d}\Delta\eta \mathrm{d}\Delta\varphi} = \frac{S(\Delta\eta, \Delta\varphi)}{B(\Delta\eta, \Delta\varphi)}, \qquad (3.1) $$

where $N_{\text{trig}}$ is the total number of trigger particles in the given event class, the signal function $S(\Delta\eta, \Delta\varphi) = \frac{1}{N_{\text{trig}}} \frac{\mathrm{d}^2 N_{\text{same}}}{\mathrm{d}\Delta\eta \mathrm{d}\Delta\varphi}$ is the associated yield per trigger particle in the same event, and the background function $B(\Delta\eta, \Delta\varphi) = \alpha \frac{\mathrm{d}^2 N_{\text{mixed}}}{\mathrm{d}\Delta\eta \mathrm{d}\Delta\varphi}$ is the pair yield associated to a trigger particle when the associated particles are taken from other events which fall in the same event class. The $\alpha$ factor is chosen such that $B(\Delta\eta, \Delta\varphi)$ is unity at its maximum. By dividing $S(\Delta\eta, \Delta\varphi)$ by $B(\Delta\eta, \Delta\varphi)$, pair acceptance and single particle efficiency for both particles are corrected. To take into account the vertex position dependence of the above acceptance and efficiency, the correlation function is extracted in 2 cm wide intervals of the vertex position.

Figure 1 shows the correlation function in $\Delta\eta$ and $\Delta\varphi$ between trigger and associated particles in TPC ($|\eta| < 0.8$) – FMD1,2 ($2.9 < \eta < 3.1$) (left), TPC–FMD3 ($-3.1 < \eta < -2.9$) (center), and FMD1,2 ($4.6 < \eta < 4.8$) – FMD3 ($-3.1 < \eta < -2.9$) (right) in the 0–5% (top) and 60–100% (bottom) p–Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 5.02$ TeV, respectively. For all three combinations, a long-range correlation on the near side ($-\pi/2 < \Delta\varphi < \pi/2$), the so-called “ridge”, is observed in the 0–5% event class, while no significant “ridge” is observed in 60–100%. The long-range correlation in the away side ($\pi/2 < \Delta\varphi < 3\pi/2$) mainly results from jets recoiling opposite to the trigger particle and is visible in all event classes. Since the pseudorapidity gap between the trigger and associated particles is large, the pronounced peak structure on the near side due to jets [28], which is centred on $\Delta\eta = 0$, is not present.
<figure><img src="image_4.png" /><figcaption>Figure 1. The associated yield per trigger as a function of $\Delta\eta$ and $\Delta\phi$ as measured for TPC-FMD1,2 (left), TPC-FMD3 (central), and FMD1,2-FMD3 (right) correlations in the 0-5% (top) and 60-100% (bottom) p-Pb collisions.</figcaption></figure>

In central p-Pb collisions at the LHC, the near-side “ridge” structure is observed to extend up to a pseudorapidity separation of $\Delta\eta \sim 8$, which is the largest range measured.

To estimate and subtract the non-flow effects due to recoil jets and resonance decays, the template fit procedure, which was introduced by the ATLAS collaboration, is employed [54, 55]. The correlation function $Y(\Delta\phi)$ is assumed to be a superposition of a non-flow contribution, which is estimated by scaling the correlation function from peripheral events, and the flow contribution. The template fit function is defined as

$$Y(\Delta\phi) = FY^{\text{peri}}(\Delta\phi) + G^{\text{tmp}}\left\{1 + 2\sum_{n=2}^{3} V_{n,n}^{\text{tmp}} \cos(n\Delta\phi)\right\}, \quad (3.2)$$

where $F$, $G^{\text{tmp}}$, and $V_{n,n}^{\text{tmp}}$ are free parameters. $Y^{\text{peri}}(\Delta\phi)$ is the correlation function in peripheral events. $V_{n,n}^{\text{tmp}}$ represents the n-th flow coefficient, and $F$ and $G$ are the scaling factors of the non-flow distribution on the away side and a flat, azimuth-independent baseline, respectively. This method assumes no flow components in the peripheral event used for the template and no away-side jet modifications between central and peripheral events.

Figure 2 shows the projection of the correlation functions, i.e., TPC-FMD1,2 (left), TPC-FMD3 (center), FMD1,2-FMD3 (right), onto the $\Delta\phi$ axis in the 0-5% event class. These one-dimensional correlations are fitted by the template fit function using eq. (3.2). The fit describes the data well with a $\chi^2/ndf$ of about 0.8-2.5 for all correlation functions corresponding to all $\eta$ gap combinations. The flow-like part of the fit is dominated by the second harmonic for all three correlations. The modulation for the pair correlation is extracted for each harmonic in the template fit.
<figure><img src="image_5.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 2.** Projection of the correlation function of TPC-FMD1,2 (left), TPC-FMD3 (central), and FMD1,2-FMD3 (right) correlations in 0–5% p–Pb collisions with the template fit using eq. (3.2). The open circle blue marker represents the scaled peripheral distribution plus the Flow baseline, G. The red and green dashed lines represent the second- and third-order components plus the baseline, respectively.</figcaption></figure>

Assuming that the relative modulation of the two-particle correlation function is solely due to the modulation of the single-particle distribution, the modulation of the two-particle correlation measured in two different pseudorapidity ranges for particles a and b can be factorized as:

$$V_{n,n}(\eta_a, \eta_b) = v_n(\eta_a)v_n(\eta_b). \qquad (3.3)$$

If this factorization holds, the flow component of a single particle at a certain pseudorapidity can be extracted from three dihadron correlations between different pseudorapidity regions given by

$$v_n(\eta_a) = \sqrt{\frac{V_{n,n}(\eta_a, \eta_b)V_{n,n}(\eta_a, \eta_c)}{V_{n,n}(\eta_b, \eta_c)}}, \qquad (3.4)$$

where each $V_{n,n}$ is the modulation extracted by TPC-FMD1,2, TPC-FMD3, and FMD1,2-FMD3 correlation, respectively. This method is similar to the “3×2PC” method used by PHENIX [21, 56]. The factorization breaks down if the event plane and/or the flow amplitude depend on pseudorapidity, for example because of initial longitudinal fluctuations or thermal fluctuations [57–62]. Therefore, the uncertainty due to those decorrelation effects is estimated by changing the $\eta$ gap, as it will be discussed in section 3.3.

Since the FMD is not a tracking detector, it is difficult to separate primary particles from secondary particles inside the FMD. Secondary particles are generated around the primary particle and might distort its distribution. The effects of secondary particles on the flow harmonics are estimated using MC simulations based on the AMPT and EPOS event generators [36, 63, 64]. The correction is performed based on the change in the reconstructed particle distribution after particle transport and interaction within the detector material from the original distribution. The correction factor is extracted as the ratio of the $v_2$ of primary particles over the $v_2$ of all reconstructed particles (i.e. including primary and secondary particles). In order to match the range of the FMD, which has acceptance down to $p_T = 0$, the charged-particle $v_2$ at midrapidity is extrapolated to $p_T = 0$ based on the
data of the $p_T$ spectrum and the $p_T$ differential $v_2$ of charged-particles. The factor is about 0.86 for all four centralities.

### 3.3 Systematic uncertainties

The systematic uncertainties relate to the event selection, the track selection, the correction of secondary particles in the FMD, the material budget in the FMD, the choice of the peripheral event class for non-flow subtraction, the reference pseudorapidity choice of $\eta_b, \eta_c$ to extract $v_2(\eta_a)$, and the jet modification. A systematic uncertainty is only assigned when the difference between the nominal data points and variations is statistically significant according to the Barlow criterium [65]. Table 2 shows the summary of systematic uncertainties for $v_2$, which depend on centrality and pseudorapidity as indicated by the range given. The uncertainty due to the event selection is investigated by changing the selection parameters for V0-FMD multiplicity correlations. The uncertainty slightly depends on centrality, and it is the largest in the 20-40% centrality class. The uncertainty due to track selection is evaluated by varying track selection parameters. This systematic uncertainty is 0.28-0.45% and is also the largest in the 20-40% centrality class. The systematic uncertainty related to the correction of the contamination by secondary particles is estimated using different event generators, EPOS and AMPT. The magnitude of collective-like signal in EPOS and AMPT is very different, and this check investigates how stable the correction is with respect to the magnitude of the flow. This uncertainty is found to be larger in the p-going direction than in the Pb-going direction. The number of secondary particles depends on the material budget in the ALICE environment. This systematic uncertainty is 2.3% estimated using MC simulations with increased or reduced material budget of the detector descriptions in GEANT simulation by $\pm$10%. Uncertainties associated with secondary correction and material budget are assigned only for the FMD acceptance. The systematic uncertainty of the peripheral event choice used for non-flow subtraction is estimated using the 80-100% event class instead of 60-100%. The systematic uncertainty on the reference pseudorapidity choice is investigated by changing the $\eta$ gap between $\eta_b$ and $\eta_c$ to extract $v_2(\eta_a)$. The uncertainty ranges from 2.6% to 5.1% depending on the centrality and the choice of reference pseudorapidity. The shape of the jet is modified depending on the centrality. The uncertainty is evaluated by varying the away-side width of the peripheral collisions and is 0.8-2.7%. These systematic uncertainties are added in quadrature.

### 4 Results

The $v_2$ for charged-particles in a specific pseudorapidity region can be extracted using the template fit procedure and the three dihadron correlations of TPC-FMD1,2, TPC-FMD3, and FMD1,2-FMD3, as described in section 3.2. The corresponding results of the $p_T$-integrated $v_2$ as a function of $\eta$ for the 0-5%, 5-10%, 10-20%, and 20-40% centrality classes are shown in figure 3. After applying the non-flow subtraction with the template fit approach, a non-zero $v_2$ is observed over a wide rapidity range for the first time in p-Pb collisions. The $v_2$ results in p-Pb collisions were measured previously for the pseudorapidity range of $|\eta| < 2$ by CMS [43, 44]. The $v_2$ measurements presented in this Letter significantly extend the measurements to a much wider pseudorapidity range, $-3.1 < \eta < 4.8$. This result confirms
<table><caption>**Table 2.** The summary of systematic uncertainties, which is absolute value on $v_2$. The uncertainties take values within the given range depending on the centrality and pseudorapidity for each source.</caption><thead><tr><td>Source of uncertainty</td><td>Systematic uncertainty (%)</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>Event selection</td><td>0.56–3.1%</td></tr><tr><td>Track selection</td><td>0.28–0.45%</td></tr><tr><td>Secondary correction</td><td>0.74–3.5%</td></tr><tr><td>Material budget</td><td>2.3%</td></tr><tr><td>Non-flow sub</td><td>0.76–4.6%</td></tr><tr><td>Jet modification</td><td>0.8–2.7%</td></tr><tr><td>η gap selection</td><td>2.6–5.1%</td></tr><tr><td>Total</td><td>3.9–8.3%</td></tr></tbody></table>

<figure><img src="image_6.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 3.** $p_T$-integrated $v_2\{2\}$ as a function of $\eta$ in various centrality classes using the template fitting method. Boxes show the total systematic uncertainties.</figcaption></figure>

the emergence of anisotropic flow over a wide rapidity region, as in high-energy heavy-ion collisions [18]. In addition, the $v_2$ measurements show a significant pseudorapidity dependence for all four centrality classes. It is more prominent in the Pb-going direction (positive $\eta$) than in the p-going direction (negative $\eta$). Additionally, a stronger centrality dependence of $v_2$ is found in the Pb-going direction than in the p-going direction.

Previous $v_2(\eta)$ measurements showed that the magnitude of $v_2$ is correlated with charged-particle pseudorapidity density [45]; $v_2(\eta)$ increases with increasing multiplicity. However, $v_2(\eta)$ might not be linearly correlated with $dN_{ch}/d\eta$ [42]. Figure 4 shows $v_2$ as a function of charged-particle multiplicity density for five different pseudorapidity regions and for different centrality classes: 0–5%, 5–10%, 10–20%, and 20–40%. Figure 4 demonstrates that the pseudorapidity dependence of $v_2$ is not just simply driven by the local multiplicity, $v_2$ independently depends on both $\eta$ and $dN_{ch}/d\eta$. In a fixed pseudorapidity range, $v_2$ depends
<figure><img src="image_7.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 4.** $v_2$ as a function of charged-particle pseudorapidity density for five different pseudorapidity regions.</figcaption></figure>

on local multiplicity, but at fixed local multiplicity, there is still a significant dependence on the pseudorapidity.

Figure 5 shows the comparisons of $v_2$ in 0–5% p–Pb collisions and in 60–70% and 70–80% Pb–Pb collisions, where the multiplicity is similar in the Pb-going direction between the two collision systems [42, 66]. The charged-particle pseudorapidity density at $\eta \sim 3$ is about 60 in p–Pb collisions and 80 and 37 in 60–70% and 70–80% Pb–Pb collisions, respectively. Here, the results from Pb–Pb collisions are based on the 2-particle cumulant method [18]. The $v_2$ results in p–Pb collisions are compatible with the $v_2$ in 60–70% and 70–80% Pb–Pb collisions over the entire $\eta$ range within the sizable uncertainties of the Pb–Pb results. Somewhat unexpectedly, given the potential differences in the initial collision overlap geometry, it is observed that peripheral Pb–Pb collisions and central p–Pb collisions have comparable $v_2$ at similar multiplicities.

To further investigate the origin of the flow in small collision systems, the $v_2(\eta)$ measured in p–Pb collisions is compared with hydrodynamical calculations [67] in figure 6, and with the AMPT transport model in figure 7. The 3+1 hydrodynamical model employs 3D Glauber initial conditions, viscous hydrodynamics based on MUSIC, and the UrQMD model to simulate the dynamics in the hadronic phase. The shear viscosity and color string width in the transverse plane are adjusted to $\eta_T/(e+P) = 0.08$ and $\sigma_x = 0.4$ fm, respectively, to reproduce the mean transverse momentum of identified particles and the $p_T$ dependence of charged-particle $v_2$ measured with the template fit procedure by ATLAS at midrapidity in p–Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 5.02$ TeV [67]. The hydrodynamical model underestimates the pseudorapidity dependence of charged-particle multiplicity density when centrality is determined at forward pseudorapidity, while it is reproduced when centrality is determined at midrapidity [68]. The correlation between the multiplicities at forward and midrapidity is weaker in the model than in the data. In this model, $v_2$ mainly originates from the 3D initial geometry and develops in the course of the hydrodynamical evolution. The model
<figure><img src="image_8.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 5.** The $v_2(\eta)$ in central p–Pb collisions compared with $v_2(\eta)$ in peripheral Pb–Pb collisions with a compatible mean charged-particle multiplicity in Pb-going direction. The $v_2$ Pb–Pb results were obtained using the Q-cumulant method [18].</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_9.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 6.** Pseudorapidity dependence of $p_T$ integrated $v_2$. Comparison of the measured data (black circles) with a calculation by the hydrodynamical model (blue band) [67] for the 0–5% (top left), 5–10% (top right), 10–20% (bottom left), and 20–40% (bottom right) centrality classes.</figcaption></figure>

describes the $v_2(\eta)$ measurement in 0–5% and 5–10%, while it somewhat overestimates the data in 10–20% and 20–40% at both forward and backward rapidity.
<figure><img src="image_10.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 7.** Pseudorapidity dependence of $p_T$ integrated $v_2$. Comparison of the measured data (black circles) with a calculation by AMPT with the string-melting configuration (blue band) for 0–5% (top left), 5–10% (top right), 10–20% (bottom left), and 20–40% (bottom right) centrality class.</figcaption></figure>

Similarly, figure 7 shows the comparisons with calculations by the AMPT model in the string-melting configuration. Unlike the hydrodynamical model, the AMPT with string melting is a transport model that produces collective behaviour microscopically by final-state scattering in both the partonic and hadronic phases. The $v_2(\eta)$ calculation from AMPT describes the data qualitatively in the 0–5% centrality class and reproduces the asymmetry between the Pb-going and p-going directions. However, the centrality dependence is less significant than observed in the data.

The comparisons between the $v_2(\eta)$ measurements and the calculations from the hydrodynamical and AMPT transport models suggest that strong final-state interactions are possibly the origin of a significant $v_2$ over a wide pseudorapidity range in small collision systems such as p–Pb collisions. Initial momentum anisotropy from Colour-Glass Condensate (CGC) could also play a role in high-multiplicity p–Pb collisions. However, a recent study using gluon saturation from the IP-Glasma model shows that the initial momentum anisotropy results to short-range correlation [69]. The observed finite $v_2$ extracted from ultra-long correlations will likely not be influenced by contributions from initial momentum anisotropy from CGC but more likely originates from the fluctuating initial geometry giving rise to final-state interactions.
## 5 Summary

In this Letter, the two-particle correlation function is presented as a function of $\Delta\eta$ and $\Delta\phi$ in p-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}} = 5.02$ TeV with ALICE. The “ridge” structure is observed up to a rapidity gap of 8 units between the trigger and the associate particles, in central events. A double-ridge structure is visible after the non-flow subtraction. The $p_T$-integrated $v_2$ is extracted from the correlation function and presented as a function of pseudorapidity and centrality class. Non-zero $v_2$ is observed over a wide pseudorapidity range in central p-Pb collisions for the first time. The pseudorapidity dependence as well as its asymmetric shape of $v_2$ could be well explained by charged-particle multiplicity distributions. In addition, the $v_2(\eta)$ in p-Pb central events is comparable with the $v_2(\eta)$ in peripheral Pb-Pb collisions at similar multiplicity. Finally, both hydrodynamical [67] and AMPT transport model calculations [36] describe the data qualitatively over a wide pseudorapidity region. The comparison with the model calculations suggests the emergence of collective flow at very forward pseudorapidity ($|\eta| \sim 5$) region in p-Pb collisions, just like in high-energy heavy-ion collisions. The results suggest an important role of final-state interactions in developing anisotropic flow in small collision systems.

## Acknowledgments

The ALICE Collaboration would like to thank all its engineers and technicians for their invaluable contributions to the construction of the experiment and the CERN accelerator teams for the outstanding performance of the LHC complex. The ALICE Collaboration gratefully acknowledges the resources and support 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 building and running the ALICE detector: A. I. Alikhanyan National Science Laboratory (Yerevan Physics Institute) 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 Nationalstiftung für Forschung, Technologie und Entwicklung, Austria; Ministry of Communications and High Technologies, National Nuclear Research Center, Azerbaijan; Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq), Financiadora de Estudos e Projetos (Finep), Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP) and Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Brazil; Bulgarian Ministry of Education and Science, within the National Roadmap for Research Infrastructures 2020–2027 (object CERN), Bulgaria; 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 Education and Croatian Science Foundation, Croatia; Centro de Aplicaciones Tecnológicas y Desarrollo Nuclear (CEADEN), Cubaenergía, Cuba; Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic, Czech Republic; The Danish Council for Independent Research | Natural Sciences, the VILLUM FONDEN and Danish 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 Physique des Particules (IN2P3) and Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), France; Bundesministerium für
Bildung und Forschung (BMBF) and GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung GmbH, Germany; General Secretariat for Research and Technology, Ministry of Education, Research and Religions, Greece; National Research, Development and Innovation Office, Hungary; Department of Atomic Energy Government of India (DAE), Department of Science and Technology, Government of India (DST), University Grants Commission, Government of India (UGC) and Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), India; National Research and Innovation Agency - BRIN, Indonesia; Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare (INFN), Italy; Japanese Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (MEXT) and Japan Society 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) and Dirección General de Asuntos del Personal Academico (DGAPA), Mexico; Nederlandse Organisatie voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (NWO), Netherlands; The Research Council of Norway, Norway; Commission on Science and Technology for Sustainable Development in the South (COMSATS), Pakistan; Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Peru; Ministry of Education and Science, National Science Centre and WUT ID-UB, Poland; Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information and National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF), Republic of Korea; Ministry of Education and Scientific Research, Institute of Atomic Physics, Ministry of Research and Innovation and Institute of Atomic Physics and University Politehnica of Bucharest, Romania; Ministry of Education, Science, Research and Sport of the Slovak Republic, Slovakia; National Research Foundation of South Africa, South Africa; Swedish Research Council (VR) and Knut & Alice Wallenberg Foundation (KAW), Sweden; European Organization for Nuclear Research, Switzerland; Suranaree University of Technology (SUT), National Science and Technology Development Agency (NSTDA) and National Science, Research and Innovation Fund (NSRF via PMU-B B05F650021), Thailand; Turkish Energy, Nuclear and Mineral Research Agency (TENMAK), Turkey; National Academy of 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 of Energy, Office of Nuclear Physics (DOE NP), United States of America. In addition, individual groups or members have received support from: European Research Council, Strong 2020 - Horizon 2020 (grant nos. 950692, 824093), European Union; Academy of Finland (Center of Excellence in Quark Matter) (grant nos. 346327, 346328), Finland.

## A Non-flow subtraction with the improved-template-fit method and peripheral subtraction procedure

To examine the robustness of the observation, two different derived template-fit methods for non-flow suppression are employed: the zero-yield-at-minimum (ZYAM) and the improved-template-fit method [54, 70]. Henceforth, the peripheral subtraction will denote the ZYAM template-fit method. The term of $FY^{\text{peri}}(\Delta\varphi)$ in eq. (3.2) is substituted by $FY^{\text{peri}}(\Delta\varphi) - Y_0$, where $Y_0$ is the baseline of the correlation function in peripheral events, which is determined at $\Delta\varphi \sim 0$. The peripheral subtraction method assumes that the 2nd-order modulation is zero when the multiplicity is zero. An improved-template-fit method was developed to estimate the non-flow effects in peripheral collisions more realistically. This method assumes
that there are no flow components in the peripheral events. On the other hand, this procedure takes into account the residual flow components in peripheral events. The flow harmonics in the second-most peripheral events are extracted by the template fit using the correlation function in the most peripheral events given by

$$Y^{\text{peri}}(\Delta\varphi) = Y_{\text{non-flow}}(\Delta\varphi) + G^{\text{peri}}\left\{1 + 2\sum_{n=2}^{3} v_{n,n}^{\text{peri}} \cos(n\Delta\varphi)\right\}, \quad (A.1)$$

where $Y^{\text{peri}}(\Delta\varphi)$ and $Y_{\text{non-flow}}(\Delta\varphi)$ are the correlation functions in the second-most and the most peripheral events, respectively. By substituting eq. (A.1) with eq. (3), it can be seen that

$$Y(\Delta\varphi) = F Y_{\text{non-flow}}(\Delta\varphi) + (G^{\text{tmp}} + F G^{\text{peri}}) \left\{ 1 + 2 \sum_{n=2}^{3} \frac{G^{\text{tmp}} v_{n,n}^{\text{tmp}} + F G^{\text{peri}} v_{n,n}^{\text{peri}}}{G^{\text{tmp}} + F G^{\text{peri}}} \cos(n\Delta\varphi) \right\}. \quad (A.2)$$

Finally, the non-flow subtracted flow coefficient from the improved-template-fit method, $v_{n,n}^{\text{imp}}$, can be obtained as

$$v_{n,n}^{\text{imp}} = v_{n,n}^{\text{tmp}} - \frac{FG^{\text{peri}}}{G^{\text{tmp}} + FG^{\text{peri}}} (v_{n,n}^{\text{tmp}} - v_{n,n}^{\text{peri}}). \quad (A.3)$$

Figure 8 shows the $p_T$-integrated $v_2$ as a function of $\eta$ with two different non-flow suppression methods for 0–5%, 5–10%, 10–20%, and 20–40% p–Pb collisions. The improved-template-fit method, which considers $v_2$ in peripheral collisions, gives smaller $v_2$ than the template-fit method; however, the difference is insignificant for the presented pseudorapidity regions. The effect of the second-order component in the peripheral collision is small. The result of $v_2$ from the peripheral subtraction method, which assumes no elliptic flow in the peripheral collision, is about 15% smaller than the template procedure for the 0–5% centrality class. Regardless of which non-flow subtraction method is applied, non-zero $v_2$ results are observed for the entire presented pseudorapidity region with more than 5-$\sigma$ confidence, further confirming the observations of anisotropic flow in high-multiplicity p–Pb collisions. Figure 9 shows the $v_2$ as a function of local charged-particle density for five different pseudorapidity regions with the peripheral subtraction (left) and the improved-template-fit (right) methods. Similar to the template fit results shown in figure 4, $v_2$ from peripheral subtraction and improved-templated-fit methods show a charged multiplicity density dependence. Figure 10 also shows the comparisons of $v_2$ in 0–5% central p–Pb collisions and in peripheral Pb–Pb collisions with the improved-template-fit method and the peripheral subtraction. The $v_2$ of the improved-template-fit method is comparable to the $v_2$ in peripheral Pb–Pb collisions with similar multiplicity at forward rapidity as well as the $v_2$ of the template fit. At the same time, the $v_2$ result from the peripheral subtraction is consistent with the results in Pb–Pb in the Pb-going direction within the uncertainty; however, it is smaller in the p-going direction. Figure 11 compares the AMPT calculation and the results with the improved-template-fit and the peripheral subtraction methods. Similar to the experimental measurements, improved-template-fit and peripheral subtraction methods are also applied in these AMPT calculations. It is found that the AMPT calculations also exhibit the differences in $v_2$ from the improved-template-fit method and the peripheral subtraction, just as the data. This is
<figure><img src="image_11.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 8.** $p_T$-integrated $v_2\{2\}$ as a function of $\eta$ in various centrality classes using the improved-template-fit method, and the peripheral subtraction method.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_12.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 9.** $v_2$ as a function of charged particle density for five different pseudorapidity regions with the peripheral subtraction (left) and the improved template method (right).</figcaption></figure>

because both template-fit and improved-template-fit methods consider possible flow generated in peripheral collisions, which is the case in the AMPT model, while such flow contributions are treated as non-flow and subtracted in the peripheral subtraction method.
<figure><img src="image_13.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 10.** Pseudorapidity dependence of $p_T$-integrated $v_2$ as measured in peripheral Pb-Pb collisions and central p-Pb collisions. The Pb-Pb results were obtained with the Q-cumulant method [18]. The p-Pb results were obtained with the improved-template-fit and peripheral subtraction methods.</figcaption></figure>

<figure><img src="image_14.png" /><figcaption>**Figure 11.** Pseudorapidity dependence of $p_T$-integrated $v_2$ as measured in different p-Pb centrality classes and as obtained from the AMPT calculation with the string melting configuration. The $v_2$ were extracted using the improved-template-fit method and the peripheral subtraction.</figcaption></figure>
**Open Access.** This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY4.0), which permits any use, distribution and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited.

References

[1] ALICE collaboration, *The ALICE experiment — A journey through QCD*, arXiv:2211.04384 [inSPIRE].

[2] PHOBOS collaboration, *System size dependence of cluster properties from two-particle angular correlations in Cu+Cu and Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200-GeV*, Phys. Rev. C 81 (2010) 024904 [arXiv:0812.1172] [inSPIRE].

[3] STAR collaboration, *Minijet deformation and charge-independent angular correlations on momentum subspace (eta, phi) in Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 130-GeV*, Phys. Rev. C 73 (2006) 064907 [nucl-ex/0411003] [inSPIRE].

[4] PHOBOS collaboration, *High transverse momentum triggered correlations over a large pseudorapidity acceptance in Au+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV*, Phys. Rev. Lett. 104 (2010) 062301 [arXiv:0903.2811] [inSPIRE].

[5] STAR collaboration, *Long range rapidity correlations and jet production in high energy nuclear collisions*, Phys. Rev. C 80 (2009) 064912 [arXiv:0909.0191] [inSPIRE].

[6] STAR collaboration, *Anomalous centrality evolution of two-particle angular correlations from Au-Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 62 and 200 GeV*, Phys. Rev. C 86 (2012) 064902 [arXiv:1109.4380] [inSPIRE].

[7] CMS collaboration, *Long-range and short-range dihadron angular correlations in central PbPb collisions at a nucleon-nucleon center of mass energy of 2.76 TeV*, JHEP 07 (2011) 076 [arXiv:1105.2438] [inSPIRE].

[8] ALICE collaboration, *Harmonic decomposition of two-particle angular correlations in Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 2.76 TeV*, Phys. Lett. B 708 (2012) 249 [arXiv:1109.2501] [inSPIRE].

[9] CMS collaboration, *Centrality Dependence of Dihadron Correlations and Azimuthal anisotropy Harmonics in PbPb Collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 2.76 TeV*, Eur. Phys. J. C 72 (2012) 2012 [arXiv:1201.3158] [inSPIRE].

[10] ATLAS collaboration, *Measurement of the azimuthal anisotropy for charged particle production in $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 2.76 TeV lead-lead collisions with the ATLAS detector*, Phys. Rev. C 86 (2012) 014907 [arXiv:1203.3087] [inSPIRE].

[11] ALICE collaboration, *Higher harmonic anisotropic flow measurements of charged particles in Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=2.76 TeV*, Phys. Rev. Lett. 107 (2011) 032301 [arXiv:1105.3865] [inSPIRE].

[12] J.-Y. Ollitrault, *Anisotropy as a signature of transverse collective flow*, Phys. Rev. D 46 (1992) 229 [inSPIRE].

[13] B. Alver and G. Roland, *Collision geometry fluctuations and triangular flow in heavy-ion collisions*, Phys. Rev. C 81 (2010) 054905 [Erratum ibid. 82 (2010) 039903] [arXiv:1003.0194] [inSPIRE].

[14] G. Denicol, A. Monnai and B. Schenke, *Moving forward to constrain the shear viscosity of QCD matter*, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 212301 [arXiv:1512.01538] [inSPIRE].
[15] C. Nonaka and K. Okamoto, *Phenomenological Analysis of High-Energy Heavy-Ion Collisions*, PoS KMI2017 (2017) 014 [INSPIRE].

[16] J.S. Moreland, J.E. Bernhard and S.A. Bass, *Bayesian calibration of a hybrid nuclear collision model using p-Pb and Pb-Pb data at energies available at the CERN Large Hadron Collider*, Phys. Rev. C 101 (2020) 024911 [arXiv:1808.02106] [INSPIRE].

[17] PHOBOS collaboration, *Energy dependence of elliptic flow over a large pseudorapidity range in Au+Au collisions at RHIC*, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94 (2005) 122303 [nucl-ex/0406021] [INSPIRE].

[18] ALICE collaboration, *Pseudorapidity dependence of the anisotropic flow of charged particles in Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 2.76 TeV*, Phys. Lett. B 762 (2016) 376 [arXiv:1605.02035] [INSPIRE].

[19] PHENIX collaboration, *Quadrupole Anisotropy in Dihadron Azimuthal Correlations in Central d+Au Collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV*, Phys. Rev. Lett. 111 (2013) 212301 [arXiv:1303.1794] [INSPIRE].

[20] PHENIX collaboration, *Measurement of long-range angular correlations and azimuthal anisotropies in high-multiplicity p+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV*, Phys. Rev. C 95 (2017) 034910 [arXiv:1609.02894] [INSPIRE].

[21] PHENIX collaboration, *Kinematic dependence of azimuthal anisotropies in p+Au, d+Au, and $^3$He+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV*, Phys. Rev. C 105 (2022) 024901 [arXiv:2107.06634] [INSPIRE].

[22] STAR collaboration, *Effect of event selection on jetlike correlation measurement in d+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV*, Phys. Lett. B 743 (2015) 333 [arXiv:1412.8437] [INSPIRE].

[23] STAR collaboration, *Measurements of the Elliptic and Triangular Azimuthal Anisotropies in Central $^3$He+Au, d+Au and p+Au Collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV*, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130 (2023) 242301 [arXiv:2210.11352] [INSPIRE].

[24] CMS collaboration, *Observation of Long-Range Near-Side Angular Correlations in Proton-Proton Collisions at the LHC*, JHEP 09 (2010) 091 [arXiv:1009.4122] [INSPIRE].

[25] CMS collaboration, *Observation of Long-Range Near-Side Angular Correlations in Proton-Lead Collisions at the LHC*, Phys. Lett. B 718 (2013) 795 [arXiv:1210.5482] [INSPIRE].

[26] CMS collaboration, *Measurement of long-range near-side two-particle angular correlations in pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 13 TeV*, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 172302 [arXiv:1510.03068] [INSPIRE].

[27] CMS collaboration, *Evidence for collectivity in pp collisions at the LHC*, Phys. Lett. B 765 (2017) 193 [arXiv:1606.06198] [INSPIRE].

[28] ALICE collaboration, *Long-range angular correlations on the near and away side in p-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV*, Phys. Lett. B 719 (2013) 29 [arXiv:1212.2001] [INSPIRE].

[29] ALICE collaboration, *Long-range angular correlations of $\pi$, K and p in p-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV*, Phys. Lett. B 726 (2013) 164 [arXiv:1307.3237] [INSPIRE].

[30] ATLAS collaboration, *Observation of Associated Near-Side and Away-Side Long-Range Correlations in $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV Proton-Lead Collisions with the ATLAS Detector*, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 182302 [arXiv:1212.5198] [INSPIRE].

[31] ATLAS collaboration, *Measurement of long-range pseudorapidity correlations and azimuthal harmonics in $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV proton-lead collisions with the ATLAS detector*, Phys. Rev. C 90 (2014) 044906 [arXiv:1409.1792] [INSPIRE].

[32] CMS collaboration, *Elliptic flow of charm and strange hadrons in high-multiplicity pPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 8.16 TeV*, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018) 082301 [arXiv:1804.09767] [INSPIRE].
[33] P. Bozek and W. Broniowski, Collective dynamics in high-energy proton-nucleus collisions, Phys. Rev. C 88 (2013) 014903 [arXiv:1304.3044] [INSPIRE].

[34] R.D. Weller and P. Romatschke, One fluid to rule them all: viscous hydrodynamic description of event-by-event central p+p, p+Pb and Pb+Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s} = 5.02$ TeV, Phys. Lett. B 774 (2017) 351 [arXiv:1701.07145] [INSPIRE].

[35] J.L. Albacete et al., Predictions for p+Pb Collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5 TeV, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 22 (2013) 1330007 [arXiv:1301.3395] [INSPIRE].

[36] J.L. Albacete et al., Predictions for p+Pb Collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5 TeV: Comparison with Data, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 25 (2016) 1630005 [arXiv:1605.09479] [INSPIRE].

[37] Y. Zhou, X. Zhu, P. Li and H. Song, Investigation of possible hadronic flow in $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV p-Pb collisions, Phys. Rev. C 91 (2015) 064908 [arXiv:1503.06986] [INSPIRE].

[38] W. Zhao et al., Hydrodynamic collectivity in proton-proton collisions at 13 TeV, Phys. Lett. B 780 (2018) 495 [arXiv:1801.00271] [INSPIRE].

[39] B. Schenke, C. Shen and P. Tribedy, Hybrid Color Glass Condensate and hydrodynamic description of the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider small system scan, Phys. Lett. B 803 (2020) 135322 [arXiv:1908.06212] [INSPIRE].

[40] Y. Kanakubo, Y. Tachibana and T. Hirano, Interplay between core and corona components in high-energy nuclear collisions, Phys. Rev. C 105 (2022) 024905 [arXiv:2108.07943] [INSPIRE].

[41] M. Nie, L. Yi, G. Ma and J. Jia, Influence of initial-state momentum anisotropy on the final-state collectivity in small collision systems, Phys. Rev. C 100 (2019) 064905 [arXiv:1906.01422] [INSPIRE].

[42] ALICE collaboration, System-size dependence of the charged-particle pseudorapidity density at $s_{NN}$=5.02 TeV for pp, pPb, and PbPb collisions, Phys. Lett. B 845 (2023) 137730 [arXiv:2204.10210] [INSPIRE].

[43] CMS collaboration, Pseudorapidity dependence of long-range two-particle correlations in pPb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV, Phys. Rev. C 96 (2017) 014915 [arXiv:1604.05347] [INSPIRE].

[44] CMS collaboration, Pseudorapidity and transverse momentum dependence of flow harmonics in pPb and PbPb collisions, Phys. Rev. C 98 (2018) 044902 [arXiv:1710.07864] [INSPIRE].

[45] PHENIX collaboration, Pseudorapidity Dependence of Particle Production and Elliptic Flow in Asymmetric Nuclear Collisions of p+Al, p+Au, d+Au, and $^3$He+Au at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200 GeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121 (2018) 222301 [arXiv:1807.11928] [INSPIRE].

[46] PHENIX collaboration, Measurements of azimuthal anisotropy and charged-particle multiplicity in $d+Au$ collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 200, 62.4, 39, and 19.6 GeV, Phys. Rev. C 96 (2017) 064905 [arXiv:1708.06983] [INSPIRE].

[47] P. Bozek and W. Broniowski, Collective flow in ultrarelativistic $^3$He-Au collisions, Phys. Lett. B 739 (2014) 308 [arXiv:1409.2160] [INSPIRE].

[48] ALICE collaboration, The ALICE experiment at the CERN LHC, 2008 JINST 3 S08002 [INSPIRE].

[49] ALICE collaboration, Performance of the ALICE Experiment at the CERN LHC, Int. J. Mod. Phys. A 29 (2014) 1430044 [arXiv:1402.4476] [INSPIRE].

[50] ALICE collaboration, Pseudorapidity density of charged particles in p + Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV, Phys. Rev. Lett. 110 (2013) 032301 [arXiv:1210.3615] [INSPIRE].
[51] ALICE collaboration, Centrality Dependence of Charged Particle Production at Large Transverse Momentum in Pb-Pb Collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 2.76 TeV, Phys. Lett. B 720 (2013) 52 [arXiv:1208.2711] [INSPIRE].

[52] S. Roesler, R. Engel and J. Ranft, The Monte Carlo event generator DPMJET-III, in the proceedings of the International Conference on Advanced Monte Carlo for Radiation Physics, Particle Transport Simulation and Applications (MC 2000), Lisbon, Portugal, October 23-26 (2000), p. 1033-1038 [DOI:10.1007/978-3-642-18211-2_166] [hep-ph/0012252] [INSPIRE].

[53] R. Brun et al., GEANT Detector Description and Simulation Tool, CERN-W5013 (1994) [DOI:10.17181/CERN.MUHF.DMJ1] [INSPIRE].

[54] ATLAS collaboration, Observation of Long-Range Elliptic Azimuthal Anisotropies in $\sqrt{s}$=13 and 2.76 TeV pp Collisions with the ATLAS Detector, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 (2016) 172301 [arXiv:1509.04776] [INSPIRE].

[55] ATLAS collaboration, Measurements of long-range azimuthal anisotropies and associated Fourier coefficients for pp collisions at $\sqrt{s}$ = 5.02 and 13 TeV and p+Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.02 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Rev. C 96 (2017) 024908 [arXiv:1609.06213] [INSPIRE].

[56] PHENIX collaboration, Measurements of second-harmonic Fourier coefficients from azimuthal anisotropies in p+p, p+Au, d+Au, and He3+Au collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$=200 GeV, Phys. Rev. C 107 (2023) 024907 [arXiv:2203.09894] [INSPIRE].

[57] ATLAS collaboration, Measurement of longitudinal flow decorrelations in Pb+Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 2.76 and 5.02 TeV with the ATLAS detector, Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (2018) 142 [arXiv:1709.02301] [INSPIRE].

[58] ATLAS collaboration, Longitudinal Flow Decorrelations in Xe+Xe Collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 5.44 TeV with the ATLAS Detector, Phys. Rev. Lett. 126 (2021) 122301 [arXiv:2001.04201] [INSPIRE].

[59] CMS collaboration, Evidence for transverse momentum and pseudorapidity dependent event plane fluctuations in PbPb and pPb collisions, Phys. Rev. C 92 (2015) 034911 [arXiv:1503.01692] [INSPIRE].

[60] A. Sakai, K. Murase and T. Hirano, Effects of hydrodynamic and initial longitudinal fluctuations on rapidity decorrelation of collective flow, Phys. Lett. B 829 (2022) 137053 [arXiv:2111.08963] [INSPIRE].

[61] P. Bozek and W. Broniowski, Longitudinal decorrelation measures of flow magnitude and event-plane angles in ultrarelativistic nuclear collisions, Phys. Rev. C 97 (2018) 034913 [arXiv:1711.03325] [INSPIRE].

[62] P. Bozek and W. Broniowski, The torque effect and fluctuations of entropy deposition in rapidity in ultra-relativistic nuclear collisions, Phys. Lett. B 752 (2016) 206 [arXiv:1506.02817] [INSPIRE].

[63] Z.-W. Lin et al., A Multi-phase transport model for relativistic heavy ion collisions, Phys. Rev. C 72 (2005) 064901 [nucl-th/0411110] [INSPIRE].

[64] T. Pierog et al., EPOS LHC: Test of collective hadronization with data measured at the CERN Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. C 92 (2015) 034906 [arXiv:1306.0121] [INSPIRE].

[65] R. Barlow, Systematic errors: Facts and fictions, in the proceedings of the Conference on Advanced Statistical Techniques in Particle Physics, Durham, U.K., March 18-22 (2002), p. 134-144 [hep-ex/0207026] [INSPIRE].
[66] ALICE collaboration, Centrality evolution of the charged-particle pseudorapidity density over a broad pseudorapidity range in Pb-Pb collisions at $\sqrt{s_{NN}}$ = 2.76 TeV, Phys. Lett. B 754 (2016) 373 [arXiv:1509.07299] [INSPIRE].

[67] W. Zhao, C. Shen and B. Schenke, Collectivity in Ultraperipheral Pb+Pb Collisions at the Large Hadron Collider, Phys. Rev. Lett. 129 (2022) 252302 [arXiv:2203.06094] [INSPIRE].

[68] C. Shen and B. Schenke, Longitudinal dynamics and particle production in relativistic nuclear collisions, Phys. Rev. C 105 (2022) 064905 [arXiv:2203.04685] [INSPIRE].

[69] B. Schenke, S. Schlichting and P. Singh, Rapidity dependence of initial state geometry and momentum correlations in p+Pb collisions, Phys. Rev. D 105 (2022) 094023 [arXiv:2201.08864] [INSPIRE].

[70] ATLAS collaboration, Correlated long-range mixed-harmonic fluctuations measured in pp, p+Pb and low-multiplicity Pb+Pb collisions with the ATLAS detector, Phys. Lett. B 789 (2019) 444 [arXiv:1807.02012] [INSPIRE].
The ALICE collaboration

S. Acharya $^{126}$, D. Adamová $^{86}$, G. Aglieri Rinella $^{33}$, M. Agnello $^{30}$, N. Agrawal $^{51}$,
Z. Ahammed $^{134}$, S. Ahmad$^{16}$, S.U. Ahn $^{71}$, I. Ahuja $^{38}$, A. Akindinov $^{142}$,
M. Al-Turany $^{97}$, D. Aleksandrov $^{142}$, B. Alessandro $^{56}$, H.M. Alfanda $^{6}$, R. Alfaro
Molina $^{67}$, B. Ali $^{16}$, A. Alici $^{26}$, N. Alizadehvandchali $^{115}$, A. Alkin $^{33}$, J. Alme $^{21}$,
G. Alocco $^{52}$, T. Alt $^{64}$, A.R. Altamura $^{50}$, I. Altsybeev $^{95}$, M.N. Anaam $^{6}$, C. Andrei $^{46}$,
N. Andreou $^{114}$, A. Andronic $^{137}$, V. Anguelov $^{94}$, F. Antinori $^{54}$, P. Antonioli $^{51}$,
N. Apadula $^{74}$, L. Aphecetche $^{103}$, H. Appelshäuser $^{64}$, C. Arata $^{73}$, S. Arcelli $^{26}$,
M. Aresti $^{23}$, R. Arnaldi $^{56}$, J.G.M.C.A. Arneiro $^{110}$, I.C. Arsene $^{20}$, M. Arslandok $^{139}$,
A. Augustinus $^{33}$, R. Averbeck $^{97}$, M.D. Azmi$^{16}$, H. Baba$^{123}$, A. Badalà $^{53}$, J. Bae $^{104}$,
Y.W. Baek $^{41}$, X. Bai $^{119}$, R. Bailhache $^{64}$, Y. Bailung $^{48}$, A. Balbino $^{30}$,
A. Baldisseri $^{129}$, B. Balis $^{2}$, D. Banerjee $^{4}$, Z. Banoo $^{91}$, R. Barbera $^{27}$, F. Barile $^{32}$,
L. Barioglio $^{95}$, M. Barlou$^{78}$, B. Barman$^{42}$, G.G. Barnaföldi $^{138}$, L.S. Barnby $^{85}$,
V. Barret $^{126}$, L. Barreto $^{110}$, C. Bartels $^{118}$, K. Barth $^{33}$, E. Bartsch $^{64}$, N. Bastid $^{126}$,
S. Basu $^{75}$, G. Batigne $^{103}$, D. Battistini $^{95}$, B. Batyunya $^{143}$, D. Bauri$^{47}$,
J.L. Bazo Alba $^{101}$, I.G. Bearden $^{83}$, C. Beattie $^{139}$, P. Becht $^{97}$, D. Behera $^{48}$,
I. Belikov $^{128}$, A.D.C. Bell Hechavarria $^{137}$, F. Bellini $^{26}$, R. Bellwied $^{115}$,
S. Belokurova $^{142}$, Y.A.V. Beltran $^{45}$, G. Bencedi $^{138}$, S. Beole $^{25}$, Y. Berdnikov $^{142}$,
A. Berdnikova $^{94}$, L. Bergmann $^{94}$, M.G. Besoiu $^{63}$, L. Betev $^{33}$, P.P. Bhaduri $^{134}$,
A. Bhasin $^{91}$, M.A. Bhat $^{4}$, B. Bhattacharjee $^{42}$, L. Bianchi $^{25}$, N. Bianchi $^{49}$,
J. Bielčík $^{36}$, J. Bielčíková $^{86}$, J. Biernat $^{107}$, A.P. Bigot $^{128}$, A. Bilandzic $^{95}$, G. Biro $^{138}$,
S. Biswas $^{4}$, N. Bize $^{103}$, J.T. Blair $^{108}$, D. Blau $^{142}$, M.B. Blidaru $^{97}$, N. Bluhme$^{39}$,
C. Blume $^{64}$, G. Boca $^{22,55}$, F. Bock $^{87}$, T. Bodova $^{21}$, A. Bogdanov$^{142}$, S. Boi $^{23}$,
J. Bok $^{58}$, L. Boldizsár $^{138}$, M. Bombara $^{38}$, P.M. Bond $^{33}$, G. Bonomi $^{133,55}$,
H. Borel $^{129}$, A. Borissov $^{142}$, A.G. Borquez Carcamo $^{94}$, H. Bossi $^{139}$, E. Botta $^{25}$,
Y.E.M. Bouziani $^{64}$, L. Bratrud $^{64}$, P. Braun-Munzinger $^{97}$, M. Bregant $^{110}$, M. Broz $^{36}$,
G.E. Bruno $^{96,32}$, M.D. Buckland $^{24}$, D. Budnikov $^{142}$, H. Buesching $^{64}$, S. Bufalino $^{30}$,
P. Buhler $^{102}$, N. Burmasov $^{142}$, Z. Buthelezi $^{68,122}$, A. Bylinkin $^{21}$, S.A. Bysiak$^{107}$,
M. Cai $^{6}$, H. Caines $^{139}$, A. Caliva $^{29}$, E. Calvo Villar $^{101}$, J.M.M. Camacho $^{109}$,
P. Camerini $^{24}$, F.D.M. Canedo $^{110}$, M. Carabas $^{125}$, A.A. Carballo $^{33}$, F. Carnesecchi $^{33}$,
R. Caron $^{127}$, L.A.D. Carvalho $^{110}$, J. Castillo Castellanos $^{129}$, F. Catalano $^{33,25}$, C. Ceballos
Sanchez $^{143}$, I. Chakaberia $^{74}$, P. Chakraborty $^{47}$, S. Chandra $^{134}$, S. Chapeland $^{33}$,
M. Chartier $^{118}$, S. Chattopadhyay $^{134}$, S. Chattopadhyay $^{99}$, T.G. Chavez $^{45}$,
T. Cheng $^{97,6}$, C. Cheshkov $^{127}$, B. Cheynis $^{127}$, V. Chibante Barroso $^{33}$,
D.D. Chinellato $^{111}$, E.S. Chizzali $^{1,95}$, J. Cho $^{58}$, S. Cho $^{58}$, P. Chochula $^{33}$,
D. Choudhury$^{42}$, P. Christakoglou $^{84}$, C.H. Christensen $^{83}$, P. Christiansen $^{75}$, T. Chujo $^{124}$,
M. Ciacco $^{30}$, C. Cicalo $^{52}$, F. Cindolo $^{51}$, M.R. Ciupek$^{97}$, G. Clai$^{II,51}$, F. Colamaria $^{50}$,
J.S. Colburn$^{100}$, D. Colella $^{96,32}$, M. Colocci $^{26}$, M. Concas $^{III,33}$, G. Conesa Balbastre $^{73}$,
Z. Conesa del Valle $^{130}$, G. Contin $^{24}$, J.G. Contreras $^{36}$, M.L. Coquet $^{129}$,
P. Cortese $^{132,56}$, M.R. Cosentino $^{112}$, F. Costa $^{33}$, S. Costanza $^{22,55}$, C. Cot $^{130}$,
J. Crkovská $^{94}$, P. Crochet $^{126}$, R. Cruz-Torres $^{74}$, P. Cui $^{6}$, A. Dainese $^{54}$,
M.C. Danisch $^{94}$, A. Danu $^{63}$, P. Das $^{80}$, P. Das $^{4}$, S. Das $^{4}$, A.R. Dash $^{137}$, S. Dash $^{47}$,
R.M.H. David$^{45}$, A. De Caro $^{29}$, G. de Cataldo $^{50}$, J. de Cuveland$^{39}$, A. De Falco $^{23}$, D. De
Gruttola D 29, N. De Marco D 56, C. De Martin D 24, S. De Pasquale D 29, R. Deb D 133, R. Del
Grande D 95, L. Dello Stritto D 29, W. Deng D 6, P. Dhankher D 19, D. Di Bari D 32, A. Di
Mauro D 33, B. Diab D 129, R.A. Diaz D 143,7, T. Dietel D 113, Y. Ding D 6, J. Ditzel D 64,
R. Divià D 33, D.U. Dixit D 19, Ø. Djuvsland21, U. Dmitrieva D 142, A. Dobrin D 63, B. Dönigus D 64,
J.M. Dubinski D 135, A. Dubla D 97, S. Dudi D 90, P. Dupieux D 126, M. Durkac106, N. Dzalaiova13,
T.M. Eder D 137, R.J. Ehlers D 74, F. Eisenhut D 64, R. Ejima92, D. Elia D 50, B. Erazmus D 103,
F. Ercolessi D 26, B. Espagnon D 130, G. Eulisse D 33, D. Evans D 100, S. Evdokimov D 142,
L. Fabbietti D 95, M. Faggin D 28, J. Faivre D 73, F. Fan D 6, W. Fan D 74, A. Fantoni D 49,
M. Fasel D 87, A. Feliciello D 56, G. Feofilov D 142, A. Fernández Téllez D 45, L. Ferrandi D 110,
M.B. Ferrer D 33, A. Ferrero D 129, C. Ferrero D 56, A. Ferretti D 25, V.J.G. Feuillard D 94,
V. Filova D 36, D. Finogeev D 142, F.M. Fionda D 52, E. Flatland33, F. Flor D 115, A.N. Flores D 108,
S. Foertsch D 68, I. Fokin D 94, S. Fokin D 142, E. Fragiacomo D 57, E. Frajna D 138, U. Fuchs D 33,
N. Funicello D 29, C. Furget D 73, A. Furs D 142, T. Fusayasu D 98, J.J. Gaardhøje D 83,
M. Gagliardi D 25, A.M. Gago D 101, T. Gahlaut47, C.D. Galvan D 109, D.R. Gangadharan D 115,
P. Ganoti D 78, C. Garabatos D 97, A.T. Garcia D 130, J.R.A. Garcia D 45, E. Garcia-Solis D 9,
C. Gargiulo D 33, P. Gasik D 97, A. Gautam D 117, M.B. Gay Ducati D 66, M. Germain D 103,
A. Ghimouz124, C. Ghosh134, M. Giacalone D 51, G. Gioachin D 30, P. Giubellino D 97,56,
P. Giubilato D 28, A.M.C. Glaenzer D 129, P. Glässel D 94, E. Glimos D 121, D.J.Q. Goh76,
V. Gonzalez D 136, P. Gordeev142, M. Gorgon D 2, K. Goswami D 48, S. Gotovac34, V. Grabski D 67,
L.K. Graczykowski D 135, E. Grecka D 86, A. Grelli D 59, C. Grigoras D 33, V. Grigoriev D 142,
S. Grigoryan D 143,1, F. Grosa D 33, J.F. Grosse-Oetringhaus D 33, R. Grosso D 97, D. Grund D 36,
N.A. Grunwald94, G.G. Guardiano D 111, R. Guernane D 73, M. Guilbaud D 103, K. Gulbrandsen D 83,
T. Gündem D 64, T. Gunji D 123, W. Guo D 6, A. Gupta D 91, R. Gupta D 91, R. Gupta D 48,
S.P. Guzman D 45, K. Gwizdziel D 135, L. Gyulai D 138, C. Hadjidakis D 130, F.U. Haider D 91,
S. Haidlova D 36, H. Hamagaki D 76, A. Hamdi D 74, Y. Han D 140, B.G. Hanley D 136,
R. Hannigan D 108, J. Hansen D 75, M.R. Haque D 135, J.W. Harris D 139, A. Harton D 9,
H. Hassan D 116, D. Hatzifotiadou D 51, P. Hauer D 43, L.B. Havener D 139, S.T. Heckel D 95,
E. Hellbär D 97, H. Helstrup D 35, M. Hemmer D 64, T. Herman D 36, G. Herrera Corral D 8,
F. Herrmann137, S. Herrmann D 127, K.F. Hetland D 35, B. Heybeck D 64, H. Hillemanns D 33,
B. Hippolyte D 128, F.W. Hoffmann D 70, B. Hofman D 59, G.H. Hong D 140, M. Horst D 95,
A. Horzyk2, Y. Hou D 6, P. Hristov D 33, C. Hughes D 121, P. Huhn64, L.M. Huhta D 116,
T.J. Humanic D 88, A. Hutson D 115, D. Hutter D 39, R. Ilkaev142, H. Ilyas D 14, M. Inaba D 124,
G.M. Innocenti D 33, M. Ippolitov D 142, A. Isakov D 84,86, T. Isidori D 117, M.S. Islam D 99,
M. Ivanov D 97, M. Ivanov13, V. Ivanov D 142, K.E. Iversen D 75, M. Jablonski D 2, B. Jacak D 74,
N. Jacazio D 26, P.M. Jacobs D 74, S. Jadlovska106, J. Jadlovsky106, S. Jaelani D 82, C. Jahnke D 110,
M.J. Jakubowska D 135, M.A. Janik D 135, T. Janson70, S. Ji D 17, S. Jia D 10, A.A.P. Jimenez D 65,
F. Jonas D 87, D.M. Jones D 118, J.M. Jowett D 33,97, J. Jung D 64, M. Jung D 64, A. Junique D 33,
A. Jusko D 100, M.J. Kabus D 33,135, J. Kaewjai105, P. Kalinak D 60, A.S. Kalteyer D 97,
A. Kalweit D 33, V. Kaplin D 142, A. Karasu Uysal D 72, D. Karatovic D 89, O. Karavichev D 142,
T. Karavicheva D 142, P. Karczmarczyk D 135, E. Karpechev D 142, U. Kebschull D 70, R. Keidel D 141,
D.L.D. Keijdener59, M. Keil D 33, B. Ketzer D 43, S.S. Khade D 48, A.M. Khan D 119, S. Khan D 16,
A. Khanzadeev D 142, Y. Kharlov D 142, A. Khatun D 117, A. Khuntia D 36, B. Kileng D 35,
B. Kim D 104, C. Kim D 17, D.J. Kim D 116, E.J. Kim D 69, J. Kim D 140, J.S. Kim D 41, J. Kim D 58,
J. Kim D69, M. Kim D19, S. Kim D18, T. Kim D140, K. Kimura D92, S. Kirsch D64, I. Kisel D39, S. Kiselev D142, A. Kisiel D135, J.P. Kitowski D2, J.L. Klay D5, J. Klein D33, S. Klein D74, C. Klein-Bösing D137, M. Kleiner D64, T. Klemenz D95, A. Kluge D33, A.G. Knospe D115, C. Kobdaj D105, T. Kollegger97, A. Kondratyev D143, N. Kondratyeva D142, E. Kondratyuk D142, J. Konig D64, S.A. Königstorfer D95, P.J. Konopka D33, G. Kornakov D135, M. Korwieser D95, S.D. Koryciak D2, A. Kotliarov D86, V. Kovalenko D142, M. Kowalski D107, V. Kozhuharov D37, I. Králik D60, A. Kravčáková D38, L. Krcal D33,39, M. Krivda D100,60, F. Krizek D86, K. Krizkova Gajdosova D33, M. Kroesen D94, M. Krüger D64, D.M. Krupova D36, E. Kryshen D142, V. Kučera D58, C. Kuhn D128, P.G. Kuijer D84, T. Kumaoka124, D. Kumar134, L. Kumar D90, N. Kumar90, S. Kumar D32, S. Kundu D33, P. Kurashvili D79, A. Kurepin D142, A.B. Kurepin D142, A. Kuryakin D142, S. Kushpil D86, V. Kuskov142, M.J. Kweon D58, Y. Kwon D140, S.L. La Pointe D39, P. La Rocca D27, A. Lakrathok105, M. Lamanna D33, R. Langoy D120, P. Larionov D33, E. Laudi D33, L. Lautner D33,95, R. Lavicka D102, R. Lea D133,55, H. Lee D104, I. Legrand D46, G. Legras D137, J. Lehrbach D39, T.M. Lelek2, R.C. Lemmon D85, I. León Monzón D109, M.M. Lesch D95, E.D. Lesser D19, P. Lévai D138, X. Li10, J. Lien D120, R. Lietava D100, I. Likmeta D115, B. Lim D25, S.H. Lim D17, V. Lindenstruth D39, A. Lindner46, C. Lippmann D97, D.H. Liu D6, J. Liu D118, G.S.S. Liveraro D111, I.M. Lofnes D21, C. Loizides D87, S. Lokos D107, J. Lomker D59, P. Loncar D34, X. Lopez D126, E. López Torres D7, P. Lu D97,119, F.V. Lugo D67, J.R. Luhder D137, M. Lunardon D28, G. Luparello D57, Y.G. Ma D40, M. Mager D33, A. Maire D128, M.V. Makariev D37, M. Malaev D142, G. Malfattore D26, N.M. Malik D91, Q.W. Malik20, S.K. Malik D91, L. Malinina DVI,143, D. Mallick D130,80, N. Mallick D48, G. Mandaglio D31,53, S.K. Mandal D79, V. Manko D142, F. Manso D126, V. Manzari D50, Y. Mao D6, R.W. Marcjan D2, G.V. Margagliotti D24, A. Margotti D51, A. Marín D97, C. Markert D108, P. Martinengo D33, M.I. Martínez D45, G. Martínez García D103, M.P.P. Martins D110, S. Masciocchi D97, M. Masera D25, A. Masoni D52, L. Massacrier D130, O. Massen D59, A. Mastroserio D131,50, O. Matonoha D75, S. Mattiazzo D28, A. Matyja D107, C. Mayer D107, A.L. Mazuecos D33, F. Mazzaschi D25, M. Mazzilli D33, J.E. Mdhluli D122, Y. Melikyan D44, A. Menchaca-Rocha D67, J.E.M. Mendez D65, E. Meninno D102,29, A.S. Menon D115, M. Meres D13, S. Mhlanga113,68, Y. Miałek124, L. Micheletti D33, D.L. Mihaylov D95, K. Mikhaylov D143,142, A.N. Mishra D138, D. Miśkowiec D97, A. Modak D4, B. Mohanty80, M. Mohisin KhanIV,16, M.A. Molander D44, S. Monira D135, C. Mordasini D116, D.A. Moreira De Godoy D137, I. Morozov D142, A. Morsch D33, T. Mrnjavac D33, V. Muccifora D49, S. Muhuri D134, J.D. Mulligan D74, A. Mulliri23, M.G. Munhoz D110, R.H. Munzer D64, H. Murakami D123, S. Murray D113, L. Musa D33, J. Musinsky D60, J.W. Myrcha D135, B. Naik D122, A.I. Nambrath D19, B.K. Nandi D47, R. Nania D51, E. Nappi D50, A.F. Nassirpour D18, A. Nath D94, C. Nattrass D121, M.N. Naydenov D37, A. Neagu20, A. Negru125, E. Nekrasova142, L. Nellen D65, R. Nepeivoda D75, S. Nese D20, G. Neskovic D39, N. Nicassio D50, B.S. Nielsen D83, E.G. Nielsen D83, S. Nikolaev D142, S. Nikulin D142, V. Nikulin D142, F. Noferini D51, S. Noh D12, P. Nomokonov D143, J. Norman D118, N. Novitzky D87, P. Nowakowski D135, A. Nyanin D142, J. Nystrand D21, M. Ogino D76, S. Oh D18, A. Ohlson D75, V.A. Okorokov D142, J. Oleniacz D135, A.C. Oliveira Da Silva D121, A. Onnerstad D116, C. Oppedisano D56, A. Ortiz Velasquez D65, J. Otwinowski D107, M. Oya92, K. Oyama D76, Y. Pachmayer D94, S. Padhan D47,
D. Pagano (133,55), G. Paić (65), A. Palasciano (50), S. Panebianco (129), H. Park (124), H. Park (104), J. Park (58), J.E. Parkkila (33), Y. Patley (47), R.N. Patra (91), B. Paul (23), H. Pei (6), T. Peitzmann (59), X. Peng (11), M. Pennisi (25), S. Perciballi (25), D. Peresunko (142), G.M. Perez (7), Y. Pestov (142), V. Petrov (142), M. Petrovici (46), R.P. Pezzi (103,66), S. Piano (57), M. Pikna (13), P. Pillot (103), O. Pinazza (51,33), L. Pinsky (115), C. Pinto (95), S. Pisano (49), M. Płoskoń (74), M. Planinic (89), F. Pliquett (64), M.G. Poghosyan (87), B. Polichtchouk (142), S. Politano (30), N. Poljak (89), A. Pop (46), S. Porteboeuf-Houssais (126), V. Pozdniakov (143), I.Y. Pozos (45), K.K. Pradhan (48), S.K. Prasad (4), S. Prasad (48), R. Preghenella (51), F. Prino (56), C.A. Pruneau (136), I. Pshenichnov (142), M. Puccio (33), S. Pucillo (25), Z. Pugelova (106), S. Qiu (84), L. Quaglia (25), S. Ragoni (15), A. Rai (139), A. Rakotozafindrabe (129), L. Ramello (132,56), F. Rami (128), S.A.R. Ramirez (45), T.A. Rancien (73), M. Rasa (27), S.S. Räsänen (44), R. Rath (51), M.P. Rauch (21), I. Ravasenga (84), K.F. Read (87,121), C. Reckziegel (112), A.R. Redelbach (39), K. Redlich (V,79), C.A. Reetz (97), A. Rehman (21), F. Reidt (33), H.A. Reme-Ness (35), Z. Rescakova (38), K. Reygers (94), A. Riabov (142), V. Riabov (142), R. Ricci (29), M. Richter (20), A.A. Riedel (95), W. Riegler (33), A.G. Riffero (25), C. Ristea (63), M.V. Rodriguez (33), M. Rodríguez Cahuantzi (45), K. Røed (20), R. Rogalev (142), E. Rogochaya (143), T.S. Rogoschinski (64), D. Rohr (33), D. Röhrich (21), P.F. Rojas (45), S. Rojas Torres (36), P.S. Rokita (135), G. Romanenko (26), F. Ronchetti (49), A. Rosano (31,53), E.D. Rosas (65), K. Roslon (135), A. Rossi (54), A. Roy (48), S. Roy (47), N. Rubini (26), D. Ruggiano (135), R. Rui (24), P.G. Russek (2), R. Russo (84), A. Rustamov (81), E. Ryabinkin (142), Y. Ryabov (142), A. Rybicki (107), H. Rytkonen (116), J. Ryu (17), W. Rzesa (135), O.A.M. Saarimaki (44), S. Sadhu (32), S. Sadovsky (142), J. Saetre (21), K. Šafařík (36), P. Saha (42), S.K. Saha (4), S. Saha (80), B. Sahoo (47), B. Sahoo (48), R. Sahoo (48), S. Sahoo (61), D. Sahu (48), P.K. Sahu (61), J. Saini (134), K. Sajdakova (38), S. Sakai (124), M.P. Salvan (97), S. Sambyal (91), D. Samitz (102), I. Sanna (33,95), T.B. Saramela (110), P. Sarma (42), V. Sarritzu (23), V.M. Sarti (95), M.H.P. Sas (33), S. Sawan (80), J. Schambach (87), H.S. Scheid (64), C. Schiaua (46), R. Schicker (94), F. Schlepper (94), A. Schmah (97), C. Schmidt (97), H.R. Schmidt (93), M.O. Schmidt (33), M. Schmidt (93), N.V. Schmidt (87), A.R. Schmier (121), R. Schotter (128), A. Schröter (39), J. Schukraft (33), K. Schweda (97), G. Scioli (26), E. Scomparin (56), J.E. Seger (15), Y. Sekiguchi (123), D. Sekihata (123), M. Selina (84), I. Selyuzhenkov (97), S. Senyukov (128), J.J. Seo (94,58), D. Serebryakov (142), L. Šerkšnytė (95), A. Sevcenco (63), T.J. Shaba (68), A. Shabetai (103), R. Shahoyan (33), A. Shangaraev (142), A. Sharma (90), B. Sharma (91), D. Sharma (47), H. Sharma (54), M. Sharma (91), S. Sharma (76), S. Sharma (91), U. Sharma (91), A. Shatat (130), O. Sheibani (115), K. Shigaki (92), M. Shimomura (77), J. Shin (12), S. Shirinkin (142), Q. Shou (40), Y. Sibiriak (142), S. Siddhanta (52), T. Siemiarczuk (79), T.F. Silva (110), D. Silvermyr (75), T. Simantathammakul (105), R. Simeonov (37), B. Singh (91), B. Singh (95), K. Singh (48), R. Singh (80), R. Singh (91), R. Singh (48), S. Singh (16), V.K. Singh (134), V. Singhal (134), T. Sinha (99), B. Sitar (13), M. Sitta (132,56), T.B. Skaali (20), G. Skorodumovs (94), M. Slupecki (44), N. Smirnov (139), R.J.M. Snellings (59), E.H. Solheim (20), J. Song (17), C. Sonnabend (33,97), F. Soramel (28), A.B. Soto-hernandez (88), R. Spijkers (84), I. Sputowska (107), J. Staa (75), J. Stachel (94), I. Stan (63), P.J. Steffanic (121), S.F. Stiefelmaier (94), D. Stocco (103), I. Storehaug (20), P. Stratmann (137), S. Strazzi (26), A. Sturniolo (31,53), C.P. Stylianidis (84), A.A.P. Suaide (110), C. Suire (130), M. Sukhanov (142),
M. Suljic 33, R. Sultanov 142, V. Sumberia 91, S. Sumowidagdo 82, S. Swain61, I. Szarka 13,
M. Szymkowski 135, S.F. Taghavi 95, G. Taillepiep 97, J. Takahashi 111, G.J. Tambave 80,
S. Tang 6, Z. Tang 119, J.D. Tapia Takaki 117, N. Tapus125, L.A. Tarasovicova 137,
M.G. Tarzila 46, G.F. Tassielli 32, A. Tauro 33, G. Tejeda Muñoz 45, A. Telesca 33,
L. Terlizzi 25, C. Terrevoli 115, S. Thakur 4, D. Thomas 108, A. Tikhonov 142,
N. Tiltmann 33,137, A.R. Timmins 115, M. Tkacik106, T. Tkacik 106, A. Toia 64,
R. Tokumoto92, K. Tomohiro92, N. Topilskaya 142, M. Toppi 49, T. Tork 130, P.V. Torres65,
V.V. Torres 103, A.G. Torres Ramos 32, A. Trifiró 31,53, A.S. Triolo 33,31,53, S. Tripathy 51,
T. Tripathy 47, S. Trogolo 33, V. Trubnikov 3, W.H. Trzaska 116, T.P. Trzcinski 135,
A. Tumkin 142, R. Turrisi 54, T.S. Tveter 20, K. Ullaland 21, B. Ulukutlu 95, A. Uras 127,
G.L. Usai 23, M. Vala38, N. Valle 22, L.V.R. van Doremalen59, M. van Leeuwen 84, C.A. van
Veen 94, R.J.G. van Weelden 84, P. Vande Vyvre 33, D. Varga 138, Z. Varga 138,
M. Vasileiou 78, A. Vasiliev 142, O. Vázquez Doce 49, O. Vazquez Rueda 115,
V. Vechernin 142, E. Vercellin 25, S. Vergara Limón45, R. Verma47, L. Vermunt 97,
R. Vértesi 138, M. Verweij 59, L. Vickovic34, Z. Vilakazi122, O. Villalobos Baillie 100,
A. Villani 24, A. Vinogradov 142, T. Virgili 29, M.M.O. Virta 116, V. Vislavicius75,
A. Vodopyanov 143, B. Volkel 33, M.A. Völkl 94, K. Voloshin142, S.A. Voloshin 136,
G. Volpe 32, B. von Haller 33, I. Vorobeyev 95, N. Vozniuk 142, J. Vrláková 38, J. Wan40,
C. Wang 40, D. Wang40, Y. Wang 40, Y. Wang 6, A. Wegrzynek 33, F.T. Weiglhofer39,
S.C. Wenzel 33, J.P. Wessels 137, S.L. Weyhmiller 139, J. Wiechula 64, J. Wikne 20,
G. Wilk 79, J. Wilkinson 97, G.A. Willems 137, B. Windelband 94, M. Winn 129,
J.R. Wright 108, W. Wu40, Y. Wu 119, R. Xu 6, A. Yadav 43, A.K. Yadav 134,
S. Yalcin 72, Y. Yamaguchi 92, S. Yang21, S. Yano 92, E.R. Yeats19, Z. Yin 6, I.-K. Yoo 17,
J.H. Yoon 58, H. Yu12, S. Yuan21, A. Yuncu 94, V. Zaccolo 24, C. Zampolli 33,
F. Zanone 94, N. Zardoshti 33, A. Zarochentsev 142, P. Závada 62, N. Zaviyalov142,
M. Zhalov 142, B. Zhang 6, C. Zhang 129, L. Zhang 40, S. Zhang 40, X. Zhang 6,
Y. Zhang119, Z. Zhang 6, M. Zhao 10, V. Zherebchevskii 142, Y. Zhi10, D. Zhou 6,
Y. Zhou 83, J. Zhu 54,6, Y. Zhu6, S.C. Zugravel 56, N. Zurlo 133,55

<footnote n="1">¹ A.I. Alikhanyan National Science Laboratory (Yerevan Physics Institute) Foundation, Yerevan, Armenia</footnote>

<footnote n="2">² AGH University of Krakow, Cracow, Poland</footnote>

<footnote n="3">³ Bogolyubov Institute for Theoretical Physics, National Academy of Sciences of Ukraine, Kiev, Ukraine</footnote>

<footnote n="4">⁴ Bose Institute, Department of Physics and Centre for Astroparticle Physics and Space Science (CAPSS),
Kolkata, India</footnote>

<footnote n="5">⁵ California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo, California, United States</footnote>

<footnote n="6">⁶ Central China Normal University, Wuhan, China</footnote>

<footnote n="7">⁷ Centro de Aplicaciones Tecnológicas y Desarrollo Nuclear (CEADEN), Havana, Cuba</footnote>

<footnote n="8">⁸ Centro de Investigación y de Estudios Avanzados (CINVESTAV), Mexico City and Mérida, Mexico</footnote>

<footnote n="9">⁹ Chicago State University, Chicago, Illinois, United States</footnote>

<footnote n="10">¹⁰ China Institute of Atomic Energy, Beijing, China</footnote>

<footnote n="11">¹¹ China University of Geosciences, Wuhan, China</footnote>

<footnote n="12">¹² Chungbuk National University, Cheongju, Republic of Korea</footnote>

<footnote n="13">¹³ Comenius University Bratislava, Faculty of Mathematics, Physics and Informatics, Bratislava, Slovak Republic</footnote>

<footnote n="14">¹⁴ COMSATS University Islamabad, Islamabad, Pakistan</footnote>

<footnote n="15">¹⁵ Creighton University, Omaha, Nebraska, United States</footnote>

<footnote n="16">¹⁶ Department of Physics, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India</footnote>
17 Department of Physics, Pusan National University, Pusan, Republic of Korea

18 Department of Physics, Sejong University, Seoul, Republic of Korea

19 Department of Physics, University of California, Berkeley, California, United States

20 Department of Physics, University of Oslo, Oslo, Norway

21 Department of Physics and Technology, University of Bergen, Bergen, Norway

22 Dipartimento di Fisica, Università di Pavia, Pavia, Italy

23 Dipartimento di Fisica dell'Università and Sezione INFN, Cagliari, Italy

24 Dipartimento di Fisica dell'Università and Sezione INFN, Trieste, Italy

25 Dipartimento di Fisica dell'Università and Sezione INFN, Turin, Italy

26 Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia dell'Università and Sezione INFN, Bologna, Italy

27 Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia dell'Università and Sezione INFN, Catania, Italy

28 Dipartimento di Fisica e Astronomia dell'Università and Sezione INFN, Padova, Italy

29 Dipartimento di Fisica 'E.R. Caianiello' dell'Università and Gruppo Collegato INFN, Salerno, Italy

30 Dipartimento DISAT del Politecnico and Sezione INFN, Turin, Italy

31 Dipartimento di Scienze MIFT, Università di Messina, Messina, Italy

32 Dipartimento Interateneo di Fisica 'M. Merlin' and Sezione INFN, Bari, Italy

33 European Organization for Nuclear Research (CERN), Geneva, Switzerland

34 Faculty of Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering and Naval Architecture, University of Split, Split, Croatia

35 Faculty of Engineering and Science, Western Norway University of Applied Sciences, Bergen, Norway

36 Faculty of Nuclear Sciences and Physical Engineering, Czech Technical University in Prague, Prague, Czech Republic

37 Faculty of Physics, Sofia University, Sofia, Bulgaria

38 Faculty of Science, P.J. Šafárik University, Košice, Slovak Republic

39 Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany

40 Fudan University, Shanghai, China

41 Gangneung-Wonju National University, Gangneung, Republic of Korea

42 Gauhati University, Department of Physics, Guwahati, India

43 Helmholtz-Institut für Strahlen- und Kernphysik, Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn, Bonn, Germany

44 Helsinki Institute of Physics (HIP), Helsinki, Finland

45 High Energy Physics Group, Universidad Autónoma de Puebla, Puebla, Mexico

46 Horia Hulubei National Institute of Physics and Nuclear Engineering, Bucharest, Romania

47 Indian Institute of Technology Bombay (IIT), Mumbai, India

48 Indian Institute of Technology Indore, Indore, India

49 INFN, Laboratori Nazionali di Frascati, Frascati, Italy

50 INFN, Sezione di Bari, Bari, Italy

51 INFN, Sezione di Bologna, Bologna, Italy

52 INFN, Sezione di Cagliari, Cagliari, Italy

53 INFN, Sezione di Catania, Catania, Italy

54 INFN, Sezione di Padova, Padova, Italy

55 INFN, Sezione di Pavia, Pavia, Italy

56 INFN, Sezione di Torino, Turin, Italy

57 INFN, Sezione di Trieste, Trieste, Italy

58 Inha University, Incheon, Republic of Korea

59 Institute for Gravitational and Subatomic Physics (GRASP), Utrecht University/Nikhef, Utrecht, Netherlands

60 Institute of Experimental Physics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Košice, Slovak Republic

61 Institute of Physics, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Bhubaneswar, India

62 Institute of Physics of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Prague, Czech Republic

63 Institute of Space Science (ISS), Bucharest, Romania

64 Institut für Kernphysik, Johann Wolfgang Goethe-Universität Frankfurt, Frankfurt, Germany
65 Instituto de Ciencias Nucleares, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City, Mexico

66 Instituto de Física, Universidade Federal do Rio Grande do Sul (UFRGS), Porto Alegre, Brazil

67 Instituto de Física, Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México, Mexico City, Mexico

68 iThemba LABS, National Research Foundation, Somerset West, South Africa

69 Jeonbuk National University, Jeonju, Republic of Korea

70 Johann-Wolfgang-Goethe Universität Frankfurt Institut für Informatik, Fachbereich Informatik und Mathematik, Frankfurt, Germany

71 Korea Institute of Science and Technology Information, Daejeon, Republic of Korea

72 KTO Karatay University, Konya, Turkey

73 Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et de Cosmologie, Université Grenoble-Alpes, CNRS-IN2P3, Grenoble, France

74 Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, California, United States

75 Lund University Department of Physics, Division of Particle Physics, Lund, Sweden

76 Nagasaki Institute of Applied Science, Nagasaki, Japan

77 Nara Women's University (NWU), Nara, Japan

78 National and Kapodistrian University of Athens, School of Science, Department of Physics, Athens, Greece

79 National Centre for Nuclear Research, Warsaw, Poland

80 National Institute of Science Education and Research, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Jatni, India

81 National Nuclear Research Center, Baku, Azerbaijan

82 National Research and Innovation Agency - BRIN, Jakarta, Indonesia

83 Niels Bohr Institute, University of Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark

84 Nikhef, National Institute for subatomic physics, Amsterdam, Netherlands

85 Nuclear Physics Group, STFC Daresbury Laboratory, Daresbury, United Kingdom

86 Nuclear Physics Institute of the Czech Academy of Sciences, Husinec-Řež, Czech Republic

87 Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Oak Ridge, Tennessee, United States

88 Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, United States

89 Physics department, Faculty of science, University of Zagreb, Zagreb, Croatia

90 Physics Department, Panjab University, Chandigarh, India

91 Physics Department, University of Jammu, Jammu, India

92 Physics Program and International Institute for Sustainability with Knotted Chiral Meta Matter (SKCM2), Hiroshima University, Hiroshima, Japan

93 Physikalisches Institut, Eberhard-Karls-Universität Tübingen, Tübingen, Germany

94 Physikalisches Institut, Ruprecht-Karls-Universität Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Germany

95 Physik Department, Technische Universität München, Munich, Germany

96 Politecnico di Bari and Sezione INFN, Bari, Italy

97 Research Division and ExtreMe Matter Institute EMMI, GSI Helmholtzzentrum für Schwerionenforschung GmbH, Darmstadt, Germany

98 Saga University, Saga, Japan

99 Saha Institute of Nuclear Physics, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Kolkata, India

100 School of Physics and Astronomy, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom

101 Sección Física, Departamento de Ciencias, Pontificia Universidad Católica del Perú, Lima, Peru

102 Stefan Meyer Institut für Subatomare Physik (SMI), Vienna, Austria

103 SUBATECH, IMT Atlantique, Nantes Université, CNRS-IN2P3, Nantes, France

104 Sungkyunkwan University, Suwon City, Republic of Korea

105 Suranaree University of Technology, Nakhon Ratchasima, Thailand

106 Technical University of Košice, Košice, Slovak Republic

107 The Henryk Niewodniczanski Institute of Nuclear Physics, Polish Academy of Sciences, Cracow, Poland

108 The University of Texas at Austin, Austin, Texas, United States

109 Universidad Autónoma de Sinaloa, Culiacán, Mexico

110 Universidade de São Paulo (USP), São Paulo, Brazil

111 Universidade Estadual de Campinas (UNICAMP), Campinas, Brazil

112 Universidade Federal do ABC, Santo Andre, Brazil
¹¹³ University of Cape Town, Cape Town, South Africa

¹¹⁴ University of Derby, Derby, United Kingdom

¹¹⁵ University of Houston, Houston, Texas, United States

¹¹⁶ University of Jyväskylä, Jyväskylä, Finland

¹¹⁷ University of Kansas, Lawrence, Kansas, United States

¹¹⁸ University of Liverpool, Liverpool, United Kingdom

¹¹⁹ University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, China

¹²⁰ University of South-Eastern Norway, Kongsberg, Norway

¹²¹ University of Tennessee, Knoxville, Tennessee, United States

¹²² University of the Witwatersrand, Johannesburg, South Africa

¹²³ University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan

¹²⁴ University of Tsukuba, Tsukuba, Japan

¹²⁵ University Politehnica of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania

¹²⁶ Université Clermont Auvergne, CNRS/IN2P3, LPC, Clermont-Ferrand, France

¹²⁷ Université de Lyon, CNRS/IN2P3, Institut de Physique des 2 Infinis de Lyon, Lyon, France

¹²⁸ Université de Strasbourg, CNRS, IPHC UMR 7178, F-67000 Strasbourg, France, Strasbourg, France

¹²⁹ Université Paris-Saclay, Centre d'Etudes de Saclay (CEA), IRFU, Département de Physique Nucléaire (DPhN), Saclay, France

¹³⁰ Université Paris-Saclay, CNRS/IN2P3, IJCLab, Orsay, France

¹³¹ Università degli Studi di Foggia, Foggia, Italy

¹³² Università del Piemonte Orientale, Vercelli, Italy

¹³³ Università di Brescia, Brescia, Italy

¹³⁴ Variable Energy Cyclotron Centre, Homi Bhabha National Institute, Kolkata, India

¹³⁵ Warsaw University of Technology, Warsaw, Poland

¹³⁶ Wayne State University, Detroit, Michigan, United States

¹³⁷ Westfälische Wilhelms-Universität Münster, Institut für Kernphysik, Münster, Germany

¹³⁸ Wigner Research Centre for Physics, Budapest, Hungary

¹³⁹ Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut, United States

¹⁴⁰ Yonsei University, Seoul, Republic of Korea

¹⁴¹ Zentrum für Technologie und Transfer (ZTT), Worms, Germany

¹⁴² Affiliated with an institute covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN

¹⁴³ Affiliated with an international laboratory covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN.

¹ Also at: Max-Planck-Institut für Physik, Munich, Germany

¹¹ Also at: Italian National Agency for New Technologies, Energy and Sustainable Economic Development (ENEA), Bologna, Italy

¹¹¹ Also at: Dipartimento DET del Politecnico di Torino, Turin, Italy

¹⁴⁴ Also at: Department of Applied Physics, Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India

V Also at: Institute of Theoretical Physics, University of Wroclaw, Poland

V¹ Also at: An institution covered by a cooperation agreement with CERN