- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine

Physical Review C

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
  • Open Access

Pion-kaon femtoscopy as a probe of the space-time emission anisotropies due to interactions at the hadronic stage of matter evolution in relativistic heavy-ion collisions

P. Chakraborty1,*, G. Kornakov1,†, A. Kisiel1,‡, Yu. M. Sinyukov1,2,§, V. M. Shapoval2,∥, and S. Dash3,¶

  • *Contact author: pritam.chakraborty@cern.ch
  • †Contact author: georgy.kornakov@pw.edu.pl
  • ‡Contact author: adam.kisiel@pw.edu.pl
  • §Contact author: yu.sinyukov@gmail.com
  • ∥Contact author: shapoval@bitp.kyiv.ua
  • Contact author: sadhana@phy.iitb.ac.in
PDF

Phys. Rev. C 113, 014913 – Published 28 January, 2026

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/tlzz-sks4

Abstract

Emission asymmetries between pions and kaons reflect the role of the hadronic phase in the cooling of a droplet of deconfined strongly interacting matter. This study compares results from two models at the same collision energy of sNN=5.02 TeV to investigate how interactions in the hadronic phase affect particle emission. The first model, the integrated hydrokinetic model (iHKM), provides a complete description of all stages of the evolution; from the initial scattering and thermalization to the final hadronic state, while the second model, LQTH (LHYQUID+THERMINATOR2), assumes a sudden conversion into hadrons, neglecting further interactions. To increase the sensitivity to hadronic interactions, the analysis was performed as a function of the pair transverse velocity for pairs with nearly equal velocity vectors. The obtained predictions are compared with previously measured ALICE data at sNN=2.76 TeV as a function of the cube root of the average particle multiplicity density at midrapidity, showing that both radii and emission asymmetries scale with particle multiplicity, regardless of the collision energy. The iHKM reproduces the measured trends both qualitatively and quantitatively, whereas the LQTH model requires additional parameters—in particular, a time delay in the emission of kaons—to achieve quantitative agreement. The comparative analysis also indicates a possible nonmonotonic behavior of the asymmetry as a function of transverse velocity, and a constant scaling of the ratio between the emission asymmetry and femtoscopic radii with particle multiplicity. These results highlight the importance of including interactions in the hadronic stage for a complete description of the emission function.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (53)

  1. J. Adams, et al., (STAR Collaboration), Nucl. Phys. A 757, 102 (2005).
  2. K. Adcox, et al. (PHENIX Collaboration), Nucl. Phys. A 757, 184 (2005).
  3. G. Goldhaber, S. Goldhaber, W. Lee, and A. Pais, Phys. Rev. 120, 300 (1960).
  4. G. I. Kopylov and M. I. Podgoretsky, Yad. Fiz. 15, 392 (1972) [Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 15, 219 (1972)].
  5. G. I. Kopylov, Phys. Lett. B 50, 472 (1974).
  6. G. Cocconi, Phys. Lett. B 49, 459 (1974).
  7. M. Gyulassy, S. K. Kauffmann, and L. W. Wilson, Phys. Rev. C 20, 2267 (1979).
  8. S. Pratt, Phys. Rev. D 33, 1314 (1986).
  9. A. N. Makhlin and Yu. M. Sinyukov, Yad. Fiz. (USSR) 46, 637 (1987).
  10. A. N. Makhlin and Y. M. Sinyukov, Z. Phys. C 39, 69 (1988).
  11. Y. M. Sinyukov, Nucl. Phys. A 498, 151 (1989).
  12. Y. Hama and S. S. Padula, Phys. Rev. D 37, 3237 (1988).
  13. Y. M. Sinyukov, Nucl. Phys. A 566, 589 (1994).
  14. S. V. Akkelin and Y. M. Sinyukov, Phys. Lett. B 356, 525 (1995).
  15. S. Acharya, et al. (ALICE Collaboration), Phys. Rev. C 96, 064613 (2017).
  16. V. M. Shapoval, P. Braun-Munzinger, I. A. Karpenko, and Y. M. Sinyukov, Nucl. Phys. A 929, 1 (2014).
  17. R. Lednicky, V. L. Lyuboshits, B. Erazmus, and D. Nouais, Phys. Lett. B 373, 30 (1996).
  18. S. Voloshin, R. Lednicky, S. Panitkin, and N. Xu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 4766 (1997).
  19. A. Kisiel, Phys. Rev. C 81, 064906 (2010).
  20. Y. M. Sinyukov, V. M. Shapoval, and V. Y. Naboka, Nucl. Phys. A 946, 227 (2016).
  21. V. M. Shapoval and Y. M. Sinyukov, Nucl. Phys. A 1016, 122322 (2021).
  22. Y. Sinyukov, V. Shapoval, and M. Adzhymambetov, Universe 9, 433 (2023).
  23. V. M. Shapoval, P. Braun-Munzinger, and Y. M. Sinyukov, Nucl. Phys. A 968, 391 (2017).
  24. S. Acharya, et al. (ALICE collaboration), Phys. Lett. B 813, 136030 (2021).
  25. V. Y. Naboka, S. V. Akkelin, I. A. Karpenko, and Y. M. Sinyukov, Phys. Rev. C 91, 014906 (2015).
  26. V. Y. Naboka, I. A. Karpenko, and Y. M. Sinyukov, Phys. Rev. C 93, 024902 (2016).
  27. P. Bozek, W. Broniowski, M. Rybczynski, and G. Stefanek, Comput. Phys. Commun. 245, 106850 (2019).
  28. F. Gelis, E. Iancu, J. Jalilian-Marian, and R. Venugopalan, Annu. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 60, 463 (2010).
  29. E. Iancu, A. Leonidov, and L. McLerran, in Proceedings of the Cargèse Summer School (Kluwer Academic, Dordrecht, 2002), pp. 73–145.
  30. W. Israel and J. M. Stewart, Ann. Phys. (NY) 118, 341 (1979).
  31. I. Karpenko, P. Huovinen, M. Bleicher, Comput. Phys. Commun. 185, 3016 (2014).
  32. M. Laine and Y. Schroeder, Phys. Rev. D 73, 085009 (2006).
  33. A. Bazavov, et al. (HotQCD Collaboration), Phys. Rev. D 90, 094503 (2014).
  34. F. Cooper and G. Frye, Phys. Rev. D 10, 186 (1974).
  35. D. Molnar, J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 38, 124173 (2011).
  36. D. Molnar and Z. Wolff, Phys. Rev. C 95, 024903 (2017).
  37. P. Huovinen and H. Petersen, Eur. Phys. J. A 48, 171 (2012).
  38. S. A. Bass, et al., Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 41, 255 (1998).
  39. M. Bleicher, et al., J. Phys. G: Nucl. Part. Phys. 25, 1859 (1999).
  40. P. Bozek and I. Wyskiel-Piekarska, Phys. Rev. C 85, 064915 (2012).
  41. M. Chojnacki, A. Kisiel, W. Florkowski, and W. Broniowski, Comput. Phys. Commun. 183, 746 (2012).
  42. A. Kisiel, M. Gałażyn, and P. Bożek, Phys. Rev. C 90, 064914 (2014).
  43. V. M. Shapoval, and Y. M. Sinyukov, I. A. Karpenko, Phys. Rev. C 88, 064904 (2013).
  44. E. Fermi, Z. Phys. 88, 161 (1934); F. L. Wilson, Am J. Phys. 36, 1150 (1968).
  45. S. E. Koonin, Phys. Lett. B 70, 43 (1977).
  46. R. Lednicky and V. L. Lyuboshitz, Yad. Fiz. 35, 1316 (1981) [Sov. J. Nucl. Phys. 35, 770 (1982)].
  47. S. Pratt, T. Csorgo, and J. Zimanyi, Phys. Rev. C 42, 2646 (1990).
  48. P. Chakraborty, A. K. Pandey, and S. Dash, Eur. Phys. J. A 57, 338 (2021).
  49. R. Lednicky, Phys. Part. Nuclei 40, 307 (2009).
  50. A. Kisiel and D. A. Brown, Phys. Rev. C 80, 064911 (2009).
  51. A. Kisiel, Phys. Rev. C 98, 044909 (2018).
  52. J. Adam, et al. (ALICE Collaboration), Phys. Rev. C 93, 024905 (2016).
  53. W. Rzesa, G. Kornakov, A. R. Kisiel, Y. M. Sinyukov, and V. M. Shapoval, Phys. Rev. C 110, 034904 (2024).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. C 113, 014913– Published 28 January, 2026
  • Received 23 October 2025
  • Accepted 12 January 2026
Crossmark - Check for updates button
Creative Commons Logo

Published by the American Physical Society under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International license. Further distribution of this work must maintain attribution to the author(s) and the published article's title, journal citation, and DOI. Funded by SCOAP3.

Published by the American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation