Reuse & Permissions

It is not necessary to obtain permission to reuse this article or its components as it is available under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. This license permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI are maintained. Please note that some figures may have been included with permission from other third parties. It is your responsibility to obtain the proper permission from the rights holder directly for these figures.

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Letter
  • Open Access

Detecting the chiral magnetic effect via deep learning

Yuan-Sheng Zhao1,*, Lingxiao Wang2,†, Kai Zhou2,‡, and Xu-Guang Huang1,3,§

  • 1Physics Department and Center for Particle Physics and Field Theory, Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, China
  • 2Frankfurt Institute for Advanced Studies, Ruth Moufang Strasse 1, D-60438, Frankfurt am Main, Germany
  • 3Key Laboratory of Nuclear Physics and Ion-beam Application (MOE), Fudan University, Shanghai 200433, China

  • *yczhao19@fudan.edu.cn
  • †lwang@fias.uni-frankfurt.de
  • ‡Corresponding author: zhou@fias.uni-frankfurt.de
  • §Corresponding author: huangxuguang@fudan.edu.cn

Phys. Rev. C 106, L051901 – Published 3 November, 2022

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevC.106.L051901

Abstract

The search for chiral magnetic effect (CME) in heavy-ion collisions has attracted long-term attention. Multiple observables are proposed, but all suffer large background contaminations. In this study, we construct an end-to-end CME-meter based on a deep convolutional neural network. After being trained over a dataset generated by a multiphase transport model, the CME-meter shows high accuracy in recognizing the CME-featured charge separation from the final-state pion spectra. It also exhibits remarkable robustness to diverse conditions including different collision energies, centralities, and elliptic flow backgrounds. In extrapolation tests, the CME-meter is validated in isobaric collisions and different model simulation, showing robust generalization performance. Moreover, based on variational approaches, we utilize the DeepDream method to derive the most responsive CME-spectrum that demonstrates the physical contents the machine learned.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

Supplemental Material

References (57)

  1. D. Kharzeev, R. D. Pisarski, and M. H. G. Tytgat, Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 512 (1998).
  2. D. E. Kharzeev, L. D. McLerran, and H. J. Warringa, Nucl. Phys. A 803, 227 (2008).
  3. K. Fukushima, D. E. Kharzeev, and H. J. Warringa, Phys. Rev. D 78, 074033 (2008).
  4. S. A. Voloshin, Phys. Rev. C 70, 057901 (2004).
  5. W.-T. Deng and X.-G. Huang, Phys. Lett. B 742, 296 (2015).
  6. N. Magdy, S. Shi, J. Liao, N. Ajitanand, and R. A. Lacey, Phys. Rev. C 97, 061901(R) (2018).
  7. J. Zhao, H. Li, and F. Wang, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 168 (2019).
  8. A. H. Tang, Chin. Phys. C 44, 054101 (2020).
  9. A. Bzdak, V. Koch, and J. Liao, Phys. Rev. C 83, 014905 (2011).
  10. S. Schlichting and S. Pratt, Phys. Rev. C 83, 014913 (2011).
  11. F. Wang, Phys. Rev. C 81, 064902 (2010).
  12. J. Schmidhuber, Neural Networks 61, 85 (2015).
  13. Y. LeCun, Y. Bengio, and G. Hinton, Nature (London) 521, 436 (2015).
  14. L.-G. Pang, K. Zhou, N. Su, H. Petersen, H. Stöcker, and X.-N. Wang, Nat. Commun. 9, 210 (2018).
  15. K. Zhou, G. Endrődi, L.-G. Pang, and H. Stöcker, Phys. Rev. D 100, 011501(R) (2019).
  16. Z. Liu, W. Zhao, and H. Song, Eur. Phys. J. C 79, 870 (2019).
  17. H. Huang, B. Xiao, H. Xiong, Z. Wu, Y. Mu, and H. Song, Nucl. Phys. A 982, 927 (2019).
  18. Y.-L. Du, K. Zhou, J. Steinheimer, L.-G. Pang, A. Motornenko, H.-S. Zong, X.-N. Wang, and H. Stöcker, Eur. Phys. J. C 80, 516 (2020).
  19. M. Omana Kuttan, J. Steinheimer, K. Zhou, A. Redelbach, and H. Stoecker, Phys. Lett. B 811, 135872 (2020).
  20. L. Jiang, L. Wang, and K. Zhou, Phys. Rev. D 103, 116023 (2021).
  21. S. Shi, K. Zhou, J. Zhao, S. Mukherjee, and P. Zhuang, Phys. Rev. D 105, 014017 (2022).
  22. L. Wang, S. Shi, and K. Zhou, Phys. Rev. D 106, L051502 (2022).
  23. P. Baldi, P. Sadowski, and D. Whiteson, Nat. Commun. 5, 4308 (2014).
  24. P. Baldi, P. Sadowski, and D. Whiteson, Phys. Rev. Lett. 114, 111801 (2015).
  25. J. Barnard, E. N. Dawe, M. J. Dolan, and N. Rajcic, Phys. Rev. D 95, 014018 (2017).
  26. P. Broecker, J. Carrasquilla, R. G. Melko, and S. Trebst, Sci. Rep. 7, 8823 (2017).
  27. A. Radovic, M. Williams, D. Rousseau, M. Kagan, D. Bonacorsi, A. Himmel, A. Aurisano, K. Terao, and T. Wongjirad, Nature (London) 560, 41 (2018).
  28. J. Carrasquilla and R. G. Melko, Nat. Phys. 13, 431 (2017).
  29. E. P. L. van Nieuwenburg, Y.-H. Liu, and S. D. Huber, Nat. Phys. 13, 435 (2017).
  30. Z.-Y. Han, J. Wang, H. Fan, L. Wang, and P. Zhang, Phys. Rev. X 8, 031012 (2018).
  31. G. Carleo, I. Cirac, K. Cranmer, L. Daudet, M. Schuld, N. Tishby, L. Vogt-Maranto, and L. Zdeborová, Rev. Mod. Phys. 91, 045002 (2019).
  32. L. Wang, Y. Jiang, L. He, and K. Zhou, arXiv:2005.04857.
  33. M. Raissi, P. Perdikaris, and G. E. Karniadakis, J. Comput. Phys. 378, 686 (2019).
  34. G. E. Karniadakis, I. G. Kevrekidis, L. Lu, P. Perdikaris, S. Wang, and L. Yang, Nat. Rev. Phys. 3, 422 (2021).
  35. Z.-W. Lin, C. M. Ko, B.-A. Li, B. Zhang, and S. Pal, Phys. Rev. C 72, 064901 (2005).
  36. Z.-W. Lin, Phys. Rev. C 90, 014904 (2014).
  37. J. Xu and C. M. Ko, Phys. Rev. C 83, 021903(R) (2011).
  38. R. S. Bhalerao, J.-Y. Ollitrault, and S. Pal, Phys. Rev. C 88, 024909 (2013).
  39. D.-X. Wei, X.-G. Huang, and L. Yan, Phys. Rev. C 98, 044908 (2018).
  40. H. Li, L.-G. Pang, Q. Wang, and X.-L. Xia, Phys. Rev. C 96, 054908 (2017).
  41. Y. Sun and C. M. Ko, Phys. Rev. C 96, 024906 (2017).
  42. D.-X. Wei, W.-T. Deng, and X.-G. Huang, Phys. Rev. C 99, 014905 (2019).
  43. X. Jin, J. Chen, Z. Lin, G. Ma, Y. Ma, and S. Zhang, Sci. China Phys. Mech. Astron. 62, 11012 (2019).
  44. G.-L. Ma and B. Zhang, Phys. Lett. B 700, 39 (2011).
  45. P. Mehta, M. Bukov, C.-H. Wang, A. G. R. Day, C. Richardson, C. K. Fisher, and D. J. Schwab, Phys. Rep. 810, 1 (2019).
  46. S. A. Voloshin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 172301 (2010).
  47. W.-T. Deng, X.-G. Huang, G.-L. Ma, and G. Wang, Phys. Rev. C 94, 041901(R) (2016).
  48. W.-T. Deng, X.-G. Huang, G.-L. Ma, and G. Wang, Phys. Rev. C 97, 044901 (2018).
  49. H.-J. Xu, X. Wang, H. Li, J. Zhao, Z.-W. Lin, C. Shen, and F. Wang, Phys. Rev. Lett. 121, 022301 (2018).
  50. S. Shi, H. Zhang, D. Hou, and J. Liao, Phys. Rev. Lett. 125, 242301 (2020).
  51. S. Shi, H. Zhang, D. Hou, and J. Liao, Nucl. Phys. A 982, 539 (2019).
  52. N. Magdy, S. Shi, J. Liao, P. Liu, and R. A. Lacey, Phys. Rev. C 98, 061902(R) (2018).
  53. X.-G. Huang, Rep. Prog. Phys. 79, 076302 (2016).
  54. D. E. Kharzeev, J. Liao, S. A. Voloshin, and G. Wang, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 88, 1 (2016).
  55. C. Szegedy, W. Liu, Y. Jia, P. Sermanet, S. Reed, D. Anguelov, D. Erhan, V. Vanhoucke, and A. Rabinovich, in 2015 IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) (IEEE, New York, 2015), pp. 1–9.
  56. L. Gatys, A. Ecker, and M. Bethge, J. Vision 16, 326 (2016).
  57. See Supplemental Material at http://link.aps.org/supplemental/10.1103/PhysRevC.106.L051901 for more information on the neural network setup details; for more information on the validation and test accuracy demonstration; and for more information on extrapolation check.

Outline

Information

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation