1: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
2: \documentstyle[twocolumn,aps,epsfig]{revtex}
3: \def\btt#1{{\tt$\backslash$#1}}
4: \def\BibTeX{\rm B{\sc ib}\TeX}
5: \addtolength{\topmargin}{0.9cm}
6: %
7: \begin{document}
8: %\draft
9: \title{Strange Resonance Production: \\
10: Probing Chemical and Thermal Freeze-out
11: in Relativistic Heavy Ion Collisions}
12:
13: \author{Marcus Bleicher and J\"org Aichelin}
14:
15: \address{SUBATECH,
16: Laboratoire de Physique Subatomique et des
17: Technologies Associ\'ees \\
18: University of Nantes - IN2P3/CNRS - Ecole des Mines de Nantes \\
19: 4 rue Alfred Kastler, F-44072 Nantes, Cedex 03, France}
20:
21: \maketitle
22:
23: \noindent
24: \begin{abstract}
25: The production and the observability of
26: $\Lambda(1520)$, $K^0(892)$ $\Phi$ and $\Delta(1232)$
27: hadron resonances in central Pb+Pb
28: collisions at 160 AGeV is addressed. The rescattering probabilities
29: of the resonance decay products in the evolution are studied.
30: Strong changes in the reconstructable particle yields and
31: spectra between chemical and thermal freeze-out are estimated.
32: Abundances and spectra of reconstructable resonances are predicted.
33: \vspace{1cm}
34: \end{abstract}
35:
36: Strange particle yields and spectra are key probes
37: to study excited nuclear matter and to detect
38: the transition of (confined) hadronic matter to
39: quark-gluon-matter (QGP)\cite{raf8286,soff99plb,senger99,JPG,stock99,and98a,sikler99,cgreiner00}.
40: The relative enhancement of strange and multi-strange
41: hadrons, as well as hadron ratios in central
42: heavy ion collisions with respect to peripheral or proton
43: induced interactions have been suggested as a signature
44: for the transient existence of a QGP-phase \cite{raf8286}.
45:
46: Unfortunately, the emerging final state particles remember relatively
47: little about their primordial source, since they had been subject
48: to many rescatterings in the hadronic gas stage\cite{Soff:2000ae,PBM99,CERN}.
49: This has given rise to the interpretation of hadron production in terms
50: of thermal/statistical models. Two different kinds of freeze-outs
51: are assumed in these approaches:
52: \begin{enumerate}
53: \item
54: a chemical freeze-out, were the
55: inelastic flavor changing collisions processes cease,
56: roughly at an energy per particle of 1~GeV\cite{Cleymans:1998fq},
57: \item
58: followed
59: by a later kinetic/thermal freeze-out were also elastic processes
60: have come to an end and the system decouples.
61: \end{enumerate}
62: Chemical and thermal freeze-out happen sequentially at
63: different temperatures ($T_{\rm ch} \approx 160-170$~MeV,
64: $T_{\rm th} \approx 120$~MeV) and thus at different times.
65:
66: To investigate the sequential freeze-out in heavy ion reactions at SPS
67: the Ultra-relativistic Quantum Molecular Dynamics model (UrQMD 1.2)
68: is applied \cite{urqmd1,urqmd2}.
69: UrQMD is a microscopic transport approach based on the
70: covariant propagation of
71: constituent quarks and diquarks accompanied by mesonic and baryonic
72: degrees of freedom. It simulates multiple interactions of ingoing
73: and newly produced particles, the excitation and fragmentation of
74: color strings and the formation and decay of hadronic resonances. At
75: present energies, the treatment of sub-hadronic degrees of freedom is of
76: major importance. In the UrQMD model, these degrees of freedom enter
77: via the introduction of a formation time for hadrons produced in the
78: fragmentation of strings \cite{andersson87a,andersson87b,sjoestrand94a}.
79: The leading hadrons
80: of the fragmenting strings contain the valence-quarks of the original
81: excited hadron. In UrQMD they are allowed to interact even during
82: their formation time, with a reduced cross section defined by the
83: additive quark model, thus accounting for the original valence quarks
84: contained in that hadron \cite{urqmd1,urqmd2}. Those leading hadrons
85: therefore represent a simplified picture of the leading (di)quarks of
86: the fragmenting string. Newly produced (di)quarks do, in the present
87: model, not interact until they have coalesced into hadrons --
88: however, they contribute to the energy density of the system.
89: For further details about the UrQMD model,
90: the reader is referred to Ref. \cite{urqmd1,urqmd2}.
91:
92: Let us start by asking whether a microscopic non-equilibrium model can support
93: the ideas of sequential chemical and thermal break-up of the hot and dense matter?
94: To analyze the different stages of a heavy ion collision, Fig. \ref{chf}
95: shows the time evolution of the elastic and inelastic collision rates in Pb+Pb
96: at 160AGeV. The inelastic collision rate (full line) is defined as the number of
97: collisions with flavor changing processes (e.g. $\pi\pi\rightarrow K\overline K$).
98: The elastic collision rate (dashed dotted line) consists of two components,
99: true elastic processes (e.g. $\pi\pi\rightarrow \pi\pi$) and pseudo-elastic
100: processes (e.g. $\pi\pi\rightarrow \rho \rightarrow \pi\pi$).
101: While elastic collision do not change flavor, pseudo-elastic collisions are different.
102: Here, the ingoing hadrons are destroyed and a resonance is formed. If this resonance
103: decays later into the same flavors as its parent hadrons, this scattering
104: is pseudo-elastic.
105:
106: Indeed the main features revealed by the present microscopic study do not contradict the
107: idea of a chemical and thermal break-up of the source as shown in Fig. \ref{chf} (top)
108: However, the detailed freeze-out dynamics is much richer and by far more complicated as
109: expected in simplified models:
110: \begin{enumerate}
111: \item
112: In the early non-equilibrium stage of
113: the AA collision ($t<2$~fm/c) the collision rates are huge and vary strongly with time.
114: \item
115: The intermediate stage (2~fm/c$<t<6$~fm/c) is dominated by inelastic, flavor and chemistry
116: changing processes until chemical freeze-out.
117: \item
118: This regime is followed by a phase of dominance
119: of elastic and pseudo-elastic collisions (6~fm/c$<t<11$~fm/c). Here only the momenta
120: of the hadrons change, but the chemistry of the system is mainly unaltered,
121: leading to the thermal freeze-out of the system.
122: \end{enumerate}
123: Finally the system breaks-up ($t>11$~fm/c)
124: and the scattering rates drop exponentially.
125:
126: Fig. \ref{chf} (bottom) depicts the average energy\footnote{To compare to thermal model estimates,
127: the energies are calculated from interacted hadrons
128: with the assumption $p^2_z=\left(p^2_x+p^2_y\right)/2$. This assures independence of the
129: longitudinal motion in the system and the chosen rapidity cut.}
130: per particle at midrapidity ($|y-y_{\rm cm}|\le 0.1$).
131: One clearly observes a correlation between chemical break-up in terms of inelastic scattering
132: rates and the rapid decrease in energy per particle. Thus, the suggested phenomenological
133: chemical freeze-out condition of $\approx 1$~GeV/particle is also found in the present
134: microscopic model analysis.
135: %..........................................................................
136: \begin{figure}[h]
137: \vskip 0mm
138: \vspace{0cm}
139: \centerline{\psfig{figure=chf_double.eps,width=3.5in}}
140: \vskip 2mm
141: \caption{Top:Inelastic and (pseudo-)elastic collision rates in Pb+Pb at 160AGeV.
142: $\tau_{\rm ch}$ and $\tau_{\rm th}$ denote the chemical and thermal/kinetic freeze-out as
143: given by the microscopic reaction dynamics of UrQMD. Bottom: Average energy per particle
144: at midrapidity ($|y-y_{\rm cm}|\le 0.1$) as a function of time.
145: \label{chf}}
146: \end{figure}
147: %..........................................................................
148:
149:
150: To verify this scenario, we exploit
151: the spectra and abundances of $\Lambda(1520)$, $K^0(892)$ and other resonances
152: which unravel the break-up dynamics of the source between
153: chemical and thermal freeze-out.
154: In the statistical model interpretation of heavy ion reactions the
155: resonances are produced at chemical freeze-out. If chemical and thermal
156: freeze-out are not separated - e.g. due to an explosive break-up of the
157: source - all initially produced resonances are reconstructable by an
158: invariant mass analysis in the final state. However, if there is a separation between the
159: different freeze-outs, a part of the resonance daughters rescatter, making this
160: resonance unobservable in the final state. Thus, the relative suppression of
161: resonances in the final state compared to those expected from thermal
162: estimates provides a chronometer for the time period between the different
163: reaction stages.
164: Even more interesting, inelastic scatterings
165: of the resonance daughters (e.g. $\overline K p \rightarrow \Lambda$) might change the
166: chemical composition of the system {\it after} 'chemical' freeze-out by as much as 10\% for
167: all hyperon species.
168: While this is not in line with the thermal/statistical model interpretation, it
169: supports the more complex freeze-out dynamics encountered in the present model.
170:
171: To answer these questions we address the experimentally accessible
172: hadron resonances:
173: At this time $\Phi$ and $\Lambda(1520)$ have
174: been observed in heavy ion reactions at SPS energies
175: \cite{NA49Res,NA49Res2} following a suggestion
176: that such a measurement was possible \cite{Bec98}.
177: SPS \cite{NA49Res2} and RHIC experiments \cite{STARkstar}
178: report measurement of the $\overline{K^0}(892)$ signal, and
179: RHIC has already measured both the $K^0$ and the
180: $\overline{K^0}$. In the SPS case,
181: the $\Lambda(1520)$ abundance yield is about 2.5 times smaller
182: than expectations based on the yield
183: extrapolated from nucleon-nucleon reactions. This is of highest interest
184: in view of the $\Lambda$ enhancement by factor 2.5 of
185: in the same reaction compared to elementary collisions.
186:
187: As an explanation for
188: this effective suppression by a factor 5, we show that the
189: decay products ($\pi,\Lambda$, etc.) produced at rather high
190: chemical freeze-out temperatures and densities have rescattered.
191: Thus, their momenta do not allow to reconstruct these states
192: in an invariant mass analysis.
193: However, even the question of the existence of
194: such resonance states in the hot and dense environment is still
195: not unambiguously answered. Since hyperon resonances are
196: expected to dissolve at high energy densities (see .e.g. \cite{Lutz:2001dq})
197: it is of utmost importance to study the cross section
198: of hyperon resonances as a thermometer of the collision.
199:
200: The present exploration considers the resonances,
201: $\Delta(1232)$, $\Lambda^*(1520)$, K$^0(892)$
202: and $\Phi$.
203: The properties of these hadrons are depicted in
204: Table \ref{a}.
205: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
206: \begin{table}[h!]
207: \begin{tabular}{lrrr}
208: Particle & Mass (MeV) & Width (MeV) & $\tau$ (fm/c)\\\hline
209: $\Delta(1232)$ & 1232 & 120 & 1.6 \\
210: $\Lambda^*(1520)$ & 1520 & 16 & 12 \\
211: K$^0(892)$ & 893 & 50 & 3.9 \\
212: $\Phi(1020)$ & 1019 & 4.43 & 44.5 \\
213: \end{tabular}
214: \caption{Properties of investigated resonances.}
215: \label{a}
216: \end{table}
217: %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
218:
219: Fig. \ref{dndy} shows the rapidity densities for
220: $\Delta(1232)$, $\Lambda^*(1520)$, K$^0(892)$
221: and $\Phi$ in Pb($160\,A$GeV)Pb, b$<3.4$~fm collisions.
222: Fig. \ref{dndy} (left), shows the total amount of decaying resonances.
223: Here, subsequent collisions of the decay products have
224: not been taken into account - i.e. whenever a resonance decays during
225: the systems evolution it is counted.
226: However, the additional interaction of the daughter hadrons
227: disturbs the signal of the resonance in the invariant mass spectra.
228: This lowers the observable yield of resonances drastically as
229: compared to the primordial yields at chemical freeze-out.
230: Fig. \ref{dndy}(right) addresses this in the rapidity distribution of those
231: resonances whose decay products do not suffer subsequent collisions -
232: these resonances are in principle reconstructable from their decay products.
233: Note that reconstructable in this context still assumes reconstruction of
234: all decay channels, including many body decays.
235: %\begin{table}[h!]
236: %\begin{tabular}{lrrr}
237: %Particle & Channel $i$ & $\Gamma_i/\Gamma$ (\%) \\\hline
238: %$\Delta(1232)$ & N$\pi$ & 100 \\\hline
239: % & N$\overline {\rm K}$ & 45 \\
240: %$\Lambda^*(1520)$ & $\Sigma\pi$ & 43 \\
241: % & $\Lambda\pi\pi$ & 11 \\ \hline
242: %K$^0(892)$ & K$\pi$ & 100 \\\hline
243: % & K$^+$K$^-$ & 49 \\
244: %$\Phi(1020)$ & K$_l^0$K$_s^0$ & 34 \\
245: % & $\rho\pi$ & 13 \\
246: %\end{tabular}
247: %\caption{Main decay channels of investigated resonances.}
248: %\label{b}
249: %\end{table}
250: %..........................................................................
251: \begin{figure}[h]
252: \vskip 0mm
253: \vspace{0cm}
254: \centerline{\psfig{figure=dndy.eps,width=3.5in}}
255: \vskip 2mm
256: \caption{Rapidity densities for $\Delta(1232)$, $\Lambda^*(1520)$, K$^0(892)$
257: and $\Phi$ in Pb($160\,A$GeV)Pb, b$<3.4$~fm collisions.
258: Left: All resonances as they decay. Right: Reconstructable resonances.
259: \label{dndy}}
260: \end{figure}
261: %..........................................................................
262:
263:
264: At SPS energies, the rapidity distributions d$N$/d$y$ may by described by a Gaussian
265: curve
266: \begin{equation}
267: \frac{{\rm d}N}{{\rm d}y}(y)
268: = A \times {\rm exp}\left(-\frac{y^2}{2\sigma^2}\right)\quad.
269: \end{equation}
270: with parameters given in Table \ref{tab1}.
271: However, in this approximation the details of
272: the rapidity distributions are lost. Especially the
273: dip in the rapidity distributions of the $\Lambda(1520)$ is
274: not accounted for.
275:
276: The rescattering probability of the resonance decay products depends
277: on the cross section of the decay product with the surrounding matter, on the lifetime
278: of the surrounding hot and dense matter, on the lifetime of the resonance
279: and on the specific properties of the daughter hadrons in the resonance decay channels.
280: This leads to different 'observabilities' of the different resonances:
281: Rescattering influences the observable $\Phi$ and $\Lambda^*$ yields
282: only by a factor of two, due to the long life time of those particles.
283: In contrast strong effects are observed in the K$^*$ and $\Delta$
284: yields, which are suppressed by more than a factor three.
285:
286: One can use the estimates done by \cite{Torrieri:2001ue} in a statistical
287: model, and try to relate the result of the present microscopic
288: transport calculation to thermal freeze-out parameters.
289: The ratios of the $4\pi$ numbers of
290: reconstructable is $\Lambda(1520)/\Lambda=0.024$ and K$^0(892)/$K$^+=0.25$.
291: In terms of the analysis by \cite{Torrieri:2001ue},
292: the microscopic source has a lifetime below 1~fm/c and a freeze-out
293: temperature below 100~MeV. Thus, the values obtained from UrQMD seem to
294: favor a scenario of a sudden
295: break-up of the initial hadron source, in contrast to the time evolution
296: of the chemical and thermal decoupling as shown in Fig. \ref{chf}.
297: However, note that these numbers are based on the above mentioned
298: thermal scenario. In fact, fitting hadron ratios of UrQMD calculations for central
299: Pb+Pb interactions at 160~AGeV with a Grand Canonical ensemble yields
300: a chemical freeze-out temperature of $150-160$~MeV \cite{Bass:1998xw}.
301:
302:
303: In fact, the rescattering strength depends on the phase space region studied.
304: Fig. \ref{ratio} addresses the longitudinal momentum distribution of
305: the rescattering strength. The probability $R$ to observe the resonance $H$
306: is given by
307: \begin{equation}
308: R=\frac{H \rightarrow h_1 h_2 ({\rm reconstructable})}
309: {H \rightarrow h_1 h_2 ({\rm all})}\quad.
310: \end{equation}
311: %..........................................................................
312: \begin{figure}[h]
313: \vspace{-0.5cm}
314: \centerline{\psfig{figure=ratio.eps,width=3.5in}}
315: \caption{Rapidity dependent ratio $R$ of reconstructable resonances over all resonances
316: of a given type as they decay. For $\Delta(1232)$, $\Lambda^*(1520)$,
317: K$^0(892)$ and $\Phi$ in Pb($160$~AGeV)+Pb, b$<3.4$~fm collisions.
318: \label{ratio}}
319: \end{figure}
320: %..........................................................................
321: The 'observability' decreases strongly towards central rapidities.
322: This is due to the higher hadron density at central rapidities which
323: increases the absorption probability of daughter hadrons drastically.
324: Unfortunately, in the case of the $\Phi$ meson this decrease of
325: the observable yield increases the discrepancies between data and
326: microscopic model predictions (e.g.\cite{soff99plb}).
327:
328: The absorption probability of daughter hadrons is not only rapidity
329: dependent but also transverse momentum dependent.
330: The decay products are rescattered preferentially at low transverse momenta.
331: Fig. \ref{dndpt} depicts the invariant transverse momentum spectra of
332: reconstructable $\Delta(1232)$, $\Lambda^*(1520)$, K$^0(892)$
333: and $\Phi$ in Pb($160\,A$GeV)Pb, b$<3.4$~fm collisions.
334: %..........................................................................
335: \begin{figure}[h]
336: \vskip 0mm
337: \vspace{0cm}
338: \centerline{\psfig{figure=dndpt.eps,width=3.5in}}
339: \vskip 2mm
340: \caption{Transverse momentum spectra at $|y-y_{\rm cm}|<1$ of reconstructable
341: resonances for $\Delta(1232)$, $\Lambda^*(1520)$,
342: K$^0(892)$ and $\Phi$ in Pb($160\,A$GeV)Pb, b$<3.4$~fm collisions.
343: The lines are to guide the eye.
344: \label{dndpt}}
345: \end{figure}
346: %..........................................................................
347: \begin{table}
348: \begin{tabular}{lrr}
349: Particle (All) & A & $\sigma$\\\hline
350: $\Delta$ & 181 & 1.49\\
351: $\Lambda^*$ & 0.89 & 1.20\\
352: K$^*$ & 22.0 & 1.23\\
353: $\Phi$ & 2.22 & 1.09\\\hline
354: Particle (Rec.) & A & $\sigma$\\\hline
355: $\Delta$ & 46.3 & 1.60\\
356: $\Lambda^*$ & 0.42 & 1.27\\
357: K$^*$ & 6.95 & 1.34\\
358: $\Phi$ & 1.62 & 1.10\\
359: \end{tabular}
360: \caption{Gaussian fit parameters for the rapidity densities of all and reconstructable
361: resonances.}
362: \label{tab1}
363: \end{table}
364:
365:
366: Fig. \ref{ratiopt} directly addresses the $p_t$ dependence of the
367: observability of resonances.
368: The present model study supports a strong $p_t$ dependence of the
369: rescattering probability. This effects leads to a larger apparent
370: temperature (larger inverse slope parameter) for resonances
371: reconstructed from strongly interacting particle.
372: A similar behavior has been found for the $\Phi$ meson in an
373: independent study by \cite{johnson00}.
374: This effective heating of the $\Phi$ spectrum might explain
375: the different inverse slope parameter measured by
376: NA49 ($\phi\rightarrow K^+K^-$) as compared to the NA50 ($\phi\rightarrow \mu^+\mu^-$)
377: collaboration \cite{soff99plb,johnson00,sikler99,willis99}.
378: %..........................................................................
379: \begin{figure}[h]
380: \vskip 0mm
381: \vspace{0cm}
382: \centerline{\psfig{figure=ratiopt.eps,width=3.5in}}
383: \vskip 2mm
384: \caption{Ratio $R$ of reconstructable resonances over all resonances
385: of a given type as a function of transverse momentum.
386: For $\Delta(1232)$, $\Lambda^*(1520)$,
387: K$^0(892)$ and $\Phi$ in Pb($160\,A$GeV)Pb, b$<3.4$~fm collisions.
388: \label{ratiopt}}
389: \end{figure}
390: %..........................................................................
391:
392: In conclusion, central Pb+Pb interactions at 160 AGeV are studied
393: within a microscopic non-equilibrium approach. The calculated scattering
394: rates exhibit signs of a chemical and a subsequent
395: thermal freeze-out. The time difference between both freeze-outs
396: is explored with hadronic resonances.
397: The rapidity and transverse momentum distributions
398: of strange and non-strange resonances are predicted.
399: The observability of unstable (strange) particles
400: ($\Lambda(1520)$, $\phi$, etc.) in the invariant mass analysis
401: of strongly interacting decay products is distorted due to
402: rescattering of decay products from chemical to thermal freeze-out.
403: Approximately $25\%$ of $\phi$'s
404: and $50\%$ of $\Lambda^*$'s are not directly detectable by reconstruction
405: of the invariant mass spectrum. The rescattering strength
406: is strongly rapidity dependent.
407: Rescattering of the decay products alters the
408: transverse momentum spectra of reconstructed resonances.
409: This leads to higher apparent temperatures for resonances.
410: Inelastic collisions of anti-Kaons from decayed strange resonance
411: alter the chemical composition of strange baryons by up to 10\%.
412: {\tiny
413: \begin{table}[h!]
414: \begin{tabular}{ll}
415: events &1400\\
416: $\Delta$/event&654.46\\
417: $\Lambda^*$/event&2.60\\
418: $K^0(892)$/event&66.2\\
419: $\Phi$/event&5.917\\
420: \end{tabular}
421: \caption{$4\pi$ yields of all decaying resonances in Pb(160AGeV)+Pb,
422: b$<3.4$~fm.}
423: \end{table}
424: \begin{table}[h!]
425: \begin{tabular}{lrrrr}
426: y & dn/dy($\Delta$) & dn/dy($\Lambda(1520)$) & dn/dy(K$^0(892)$) & dn/dy($\Phi$)\\\hline
427: 0.125 & 169.12 & 0.78 & 21.36 & 2.16\\
428: 0.375 & 167.40 & 0.89 & 20.36 & 2.05\\
429: 0.625 & 163.89 & 0.79 & 19.20 & 1.89\\
430: 0.875 & 155.86 & 0.7 & 17.56 & 1.65\\
431: 1.125 & 143.33 & 0.58 & 14.99 & 1.33\\
432: 1.375 & 128.78 & 0.52 & 12.83 & 1.10\\
433: 1.625 & 110.98 & 0.36 & 10.31 & 0.76\\
434: 1.875 & 90.976 & 0.26 & 7.554 & 0.48\\
435: 2.125 & 67.511 & 0.16 & 4.815 & 0.26\\
436: 2.375 & 47.786 & 0.09 & 2.378 & 0.09\\
437: 2.625 & 36.04 & 0.03 & 0.802 & 0.03\\
438: 2.875 & 21.583 & 0.01 & 0.2 & 0.00\\
439: 3.125 & 5.3613 & 0.00 & 0.028 & 0 \\
440: 3.375 & 0.2719 & 0 & 0.00 & 0 \\
441: 3.625 & 0.0017 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
442: 3.875 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
443: \end{tabular}
444: \caption{Rapidity density of all decaying resonances in Pb(160AGeV)+Pb, b$<3.4$~fm.}
445: \end{table}
446: \newpage
447: \begin{table}[h!]
448: \begin{tabular}{ll}
449: events &1400\\
450: $\Delta$/event&178.9\\
451: $\Lambda^*$/event&1.28\\
452: $K^0(892)$/event&22.61\\
453: $\Phi$/event&4.35\\
454: \end{tabular}
455: \caption{$4\pi$ yields of all reconstructable resonances in Pb(160AGeV)+Pb,
456: b$<3.4$~fm.}
457: \end{table}
458: \begin{table}[h!]
459: \begin{tabular}{lrrrr}
460: y & dn/dy($\Delta$) & dn/dy($\Lambda(1520)$) & dn/dy(K$^0(892)$) & dn/dy($\Phi$)\\\hline
461: 0.125 & 44.30 & 0.348 & 6.44 & 1.601\\
462: 0.375 & 43.03 & 0.437 & 6.59 & 1.484\\
463: 0.625 & 42.46 & 0.37 & 6.14 & 1.342\\
464: 0.875 & 40.05 & 0.332 & 5.75 & 1.21\\
465: 1.125 & 37.08 & 0.292 & 5.16 & 1.008\\
466: 1.375 & 33.74 & 0.262 & 4.47 & 0.797\\
467: 1.625 & 29.82 & 0.200 & 3.81 & 0.579\\
468: 1.875 & 25.72 & 0.154 & 2.91 & 0.361\\
469: 2.125 & 21.14 & 0.087 & 2.14 & 0.22\\
470: 2.375 & 16.57 & 0.050 & 1.18 & 0.0752\\
471: 2.625 & 12.43 & 0.018 & 0.46 & 0.022\\
472: 2.875 & 8.570 & 0.007 & 0.12 & 0.002\\
473: 3.125 & 2.755 & 0.001 & 0.02 & 0\\
474: 3.375 & 0.165 & 0 & 0.00 & 0\\
475: 3.625 & 0.001 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
476: 3.875 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0\\
477: \end{tabular}
478: \caption{Rapidity density of reconstructable resonances in Pb(160AGeV)+Pb,
479: b$<3.4$~fm.}
480: \end{table}
481: }
482:
483: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
484: \bibitem{raf8286}
485: Rafelski~J, M\"uller~B
486: Phys. Rev. Lett. {\bf 48}, (1982) 1066; (E) {\bf 56} (1986) 2334;\\
487: Koch~P, M\"uller~B, Rafelski~J
488: { Phys.~Rep.} {\bf 142}, (1986) 167;\\
489: Koch~P, M\"uller~B, St\"ocker~H, Greiner~W
490: { Mod.~Phys.~Lett.}~{\bf A3}, (1988) 737
491:
492: \bibitem{soff99plb}
493: Soff~S, Bass~S~A, Bleicher~M, Bravina~L, Gorenstein~M,
494: Zabrodin~E, St\"ocker~H, Greiner~W,
495: Phys. Lett.~{\bf B471}, (1999) 89
496:
497: \bibitem{senger99}
498: Senger~P, Str\"obele~H
499: J. Phys. G {\bf 25}, (1999) R59
500:
501: \bibitem{JPG}
502: {\it Strangeness in Quark Matter} (Padua, Italy, 1998),
503: J. Phys. G {\bf 25}, (1999) 143;
504: {\it Strangeness in Quark Matter} (Santorini, Greece, 1997),
505: J. Phys. G {\bf 23}, (1997) 1785;
506: {\it Relativistic Aspects of
507: Nuclear Physics} (Rio, Brazil, 1995),
508: T. Kodama et al., eds., World Scientific.
509: {\it Strangeness in Hadronic Matter} (Budapest, Hungary, 1996),
510: {\it Budapest, Akademiai Kiado}.
511: {\it Strangeness in Hadronic Matter} (Tucson, AZ, 1995),
512: {\it AIP Conf.} {\bf 340};
513: {\it Strange Quark Matter in Physics and Astrophysics} (Aarhus, Denmark, 1991),
514: Nucl. Phys. B{\bf 24B}, (1991)
515:
516: \bibitem{stock99}
517: Stock~R, Phys. Lett. {\bf B456}, (1999) 277
518:
519: \bibitem{and98a}
520: Andersen~E et al. [WA97 collaboratio]),
521: Phys. Lett.~{\bf B433}, (1998) 209;\\
522: Lietava~R et al. [WA97 collaboration],
523: J. Phys. G~{\bf 25}, (1999) 181;\\
524: Caliandro~R et al. [WA97 collaboration],
525: J. Phys. G~{\bf 25}, (1999) 171;\\
526: Margetis~S et al. [NA49 collaboration],
527: J. Phys. G~{\bf 25}, (1999) 189
528:
529:
530: \bibitem{sikler99}
531: %\cite{Bachler:hu}
532: %\bibitem{Bachler:hu}
533: J.~Bachler {\it et al.} [NA49 Collaboration],
534: %`Hadron Production In Nuclear Collisions From The Na49 Experiment At
535: %158-Gev/C/A,''
536: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 661} (1999) 45.\\
537: %%CITATION = NUPHA,A661,45;%%
538: %\cite{Hohne:jf}
539: %\bibitem{Hohne:jf}
540: C.~Hohne [NA49 Collaboration],
541: %`Strangeness Production In Nuclear Collisions: Recent Results From
542: %Experiment Na49,''
543: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 661} (1999) 485.
544: %%CITATION = NUPHA,A661,485;%%
545:
546: \bibitem{cgreiner00}
547: %\cite{Greiner:2000tu}
548: %\bibitem{Greiner:2000tu}
549: C.~Greiner and S.~Leupold,
550: %`Antihyperon production in relativistic heavy ion collision,''
551: J.\ Phys.\ G {\bf 27} (2001) L95
552: [arXiv:nucl-th/0009036].
553: %%CITATION = NUCL-TH 0009036;%%
554:
555: %\cite{Soff:2000ae}
556: \bibitem{Soff:2000ae}
557: S.~Soff {\it et al.},
558: %`Enhanced strange particle yields - signal of a phase of massless particles?,''
559: J.\ Phys.\ G {\bf 27} (2001) 449
560: [arXiv:nucl-th/0010103].
561: %%CITATION = NUCL-TH 0010103;%%
562:
563: \bibitem{PBM99}
564: P. Braun-Munzinger, I. Heppe and J. Stachel, {Phys. Lett.} B
565: \textbf{465}, 15 (1999).
566:
567: \bibitem{CERN}
568: %\cite{Heinz:2000bk}
569: %\bibitem{Heinz:2000bk}
570: U.~W.~Heinz and M.~Jacob,
571: %`Evidence for a new state of matter: An assessment of the results from the
572: %CERN lead beam programme,''
573: arXiv:nucl-th/0002042.\\
574: %%CITATION = NUCL-TH 0002042;%%
575: See also: \\ http://www.cern.ch/CERN/Announ\-cements/2000/NewStateMatter/
576:
577: %\cite{Cleymans:1998fq}
578: \bibitem{Cleymans:1998fq}
579: J.~Cleymans and K.~Redlich,
580: %``Unified description of freeze-out parameters in relativistic heavy ion collisions,''
581: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 81} (1998) 5284
582: [arXiv:nucl-th/9808030].
583: %%CITATION = NUCL-TH 9808030;%%
584:
585: \bibitem{urqmd1}
586: M. Bleicher, E. Zabrodin, C. Spieles, S.A. Bass,
587: C. Ernst, S. Soff, L. Bravina, M. Belkacem, H. Weber, H. St\"ocker,
588: W. Greiner, J. Phys. G 25 (1999) 1859.
589:
590: \bibitem{urqmd2}
591: S.A. Bass, M. Belkacem,
592: M. Bleicher, M. Brandstetter, L. Bravina, C. Ernst, L. Gerland,
593: M. Hofmann, S. Hofmann, J. Konopka, G. Mao, L. Neise, S. Soff,
594: C. Spieles, H. Weber, L.A. Winckelmann, H. St\"ocker, W. Greiner,
595: C. Hartnack, J. Aichelin, N. Amelin, Progr. Nucl. Phys. 41 (1998)
596: 225.
597:
598: \bibitem{andersson87a} B.~Andersson, G.~Gustavson, and
599: B.~Nilsson-Almquist, Nucl. Phys. {\bf B281}, 289 (1987).
600:
601: \bibitem{andersson87b} B.~Andersson {\em et~al.},
602: Comp. Phys. Comm. {\bf 43}, 387 (1987).
603:
604: \bibitem{sjoestrand94a} T.~Sjoestrand,
605: Comp. Phys. Comm. {\bf 82}, 74 (1994).
606:
607: \bibitem{NA49Res}
608: Ch. Markert [NA49 collaboration], \\ http://www.rhic.bnl.gov/qm2001/ ;\\
609: Ch. Markert, PhD thesis, Univ. Frankfurt, \\ http://na49info.cern.ch/cgi-bin/wwwd-util/NA49/NOTE?257
610:
611: \bibitem{NA49Res2}
612: V. Friese [NA49 collaboration], \\ http://www.rhic.bnl.gov/qm2001/
613:
614: \bibitem{Bec98}
615: F. Becattini, M. Ga\'zdzicki, and J. Solfrank
616: \textit{Eur. Phys. J.} C \textbf{5}, 143 (1998).
617:
618: \bibitem{STARkstar}
619: %\cite{Xu:2001cr}
620: %\bibitem{Xu:2001cr}
621: Z.~b.~Xu [STAR Collaboration],
622: %`Resonance studies at STAR,''
623: Nucl.\ Phys.\ A {\bf 698} (2002) 607
624: [arXiv:nucl-ex/0104001].\\
625: %%CITATION = NUCL-EX 0104001;%%
626: H. Caines [STAR collaboration], \\ http://www.rhic.bnl.gov/qm2001/
627:
628: %\cite{Lutz:2001dq}
629: \bibitem{Lutz:2001dq}
630: M.~F.~Lutz and C.~L.~Korpa,
631: %``Self consistent propagation of hyperons and antikaons in nuclear matter based on relativistic chiral SU(3) dynamics,''
632: arXiv:nucl-th/0105067.
633: %%CITATION = NUCL-TH 0105067;%%
634:
635: %\cite{Torrieri:2001ue}
636: \bibitem{Torrieri:2001ue}
637: G.~Torrieri and J.~Rafelski,
638: %``Strange hadron resonances as a signature of freeze-out dynamics,''
639: Phys.\ Lett.\ B {\bf 509} (2001) 239
640: [arXiv:hep-ph/0103149].
641: %%CITATION = HEP-PH 0103149;%%
642:
643:
644: %\cite{Bass:1998xw}
645: \bibitem{Bass:1998xw}
646: S.~A.~Bass {\it et al.},
647: %``Are we close to an equilibrated quark-gluon plasma? Nonequilibrium analysis of particle production in ultrarelativistic heavy ion
648: %collisions,''
649: Phys.\ Rev.\ Lett.\ {\bf 81} (1998) 4092
650: [arXiv:nucl-th/9711032].
651: %%CITATION = NUCL-TH 9711032;%%
652:
653: \bibitem{johnson00}
654: %\cite{Johnson:1999fv}
655: %\bibitem{Johnson:1999fv}
656: S.~C.~Johnson, B.~V.~Jacak and A.~Drees,
657: %`Rescattering of vector meson daughters in high-energy heavy ion collisions,''
658: Eur.\ Phys.\ J.\ C {\bf 18} (2001) 645
659: [arXiv:nucl-th/9909075].
660: %%CITATION = NUCL-TH 9909075;%%
661:
662: \bibitem{willis99}
663: Willis~N et al. [NA50 collaboration], Nucl. Phys.~{\bf A661}, (1999) 534c
664:
665: %
666: \end{thebibliography}
667:
668: \end{document}
669:
670:
671:
672:
673:
674:
675: