The correlation function
In the dihadron correlation approach, the first hadron is the trigger particle, here either a primary charged particle (hadron) or an identified \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\) meson or \(\Lambda \)(\({\overline{\Lambda }}\)) hyperon with \(p_{\mathrm T}\) in range 3–20 GeV/\(c\). Since the \(\Lambda \)–h and \({\overline{\Lambda }}\)–h correlation functions are compatible, as expected for this collision energy, the results are combined and reported in the following as \((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\)–h. The second particle is the associated particle, in this case, always a primary charged particle with a kinematic requirement 1 GeV/\(c\) <\(p_\mathrm {T}^\mathrm {assoc}\) < \(p_\mathrm {T}^\mathrm {trigg}\). By calculating the differences in the azimuthal angle and pseudorapidity for each of such pairs, three types of correlation functions are constructed: h–h, \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\)-h and \((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\)–h. For h–h correlations, pairs with invariant mass (IM) within ±5 MeV/\(c^2\) of the mass of \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\) or \(\Lambda \)(\({\overline{\Lambda }}\)) or from \(\gamma \) conversions are not accepted. The contribution from decays of the \(\hbox {K}^*\)(892) and \(\phi \) mesons, \(\Delta \) resonances and D mesons was checked and found negligible. In the case of \((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\)–h correlations, this restriction is applied to pairs with IM of a cascade (\(\Sigma \), \(\Xi \), \(\Omega \)). An example of a raw \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\)–h correlation function is shown in Fig. 1 (left panel). At \((\Delta \varphi ,\Delta \eta ) = (0,0)\), one can observe the near-side peak, which originates mostly from particle pairs fragmented within the same jet. Bose-Einstein correlations, strong decays of high-mass resonances and final state interactions may have also a small contribution for the h-h case. Due to momentum conservation, jets are produced back-to-back in the transverse plane. Thus, a second peak around \(\pi \) in \(\Delta \varphi \) is expected, which is smeared in the \(\Delta \eta \) direction, because the particles can obtain an additional longitudinal boost related to the varied center-of-mass frame of the partonic collision. In the selection of the trigger particle, the near-side jet is fully reconstructed in the longitudinal direction, but the away-side jet is not necessarily (fully) within the detector acceptance. The procedure of getting fully corrected 2-dimensional per-trigger yield is schematically written in Eq. 1. Here, \(\frac{\mathrm{d}^2N_{\mathrm {pair}}^{\mathrm{raw}}}{\mathrm{d}\Delta \varphi \mathrm{d} \Delta \eta }(\Delta \varphi ,\Delta \eta )\) is the uncorrected correlation function, \(\varepsilon _{\mathrm {trigg}}\),\(\varepsilon _{\mathrm {assoc}}\) and \(\varepsilon _{\mathrm {pair}}\) are correction factors further described in Sect. 3.2 and \(N_{\mathrm {trigg}}\) is the number of the trigger particles. Afterwards, the 2-dimensional per-trigger yield is projected on the \(\Delta \varphi \) axis and integrated (see Eq. 2) in the intervals \(|\Delta \varphi | <0.9\) and \( |\Delta \varphi -\pi | < 1.4\) to obtain the near-side and away-side yield, respectively, denoted as \(Y_{\Delta \varphi }\) in Eq. 2.
$$\begin{aligned} \frac{\mathrm{d}^2 N_ {\mathrm {pair}}}{\mathrm{d}\Delta \varphi \mathrm{d}\Delta \eta }(\Delta \varphi ,\Delta \eta )= & {} \frac{1}{N_{\mathrm {trigg}}} \frac{1}{\varepsilon _{\mathrm {trigg}}}\frac{1}{\varepsilon _{\mathrm {assoc}}} \frac{\mathrm{d}^2N_{\mathrm {pair}}^{\mathrm{raw}}}{\mathrm{d}\Delta \varphi \mathrm{d} \Delta \eta }(\Delta \varphi ,\Delta \eta )\frac{1}{\varepsilon _{\mathrm {pair}}} \end{aligned}$$
(1)
$$\begin{aligned} Y_{\Delta \varphi }= & {} \int _{\Delta \varphi _1}^{\Delta \varphi _2} \frac{\mathrm{d}N}{\mathrm{d}\Delta \varphi }\mathrm{d}\Delta \varphi \end{aligned}$$
(2)
Corrections
The corrections are described in the same order as they were applied to the data.
All MC-based corrections are calculated using events from PYTHIA8.210 (Monash 2013 tune) [13, 29], with particle propagation through the detector by means of GEANT3 [30]. The detection inefficiencies are corrected with the single particle efficiency factor, calculated in MC and applied as weight (\(1/\varepsilon _{\mathrm {trigg}}\times 1/\varepsilon _{\mathrm {assoc}}\)) for each pair. This factor was calculated separately for trigger and associated particles as a function of \(p_{\mathrm T}\), \(\eta \), \(\varphi \) and PV position. In the case of primary charged particles, a \(p_{\mathrm T}\)-dependent contamination factor is also part of the weight to account for the amount of secondary particles in the sample. This is defined as a ratio of only primary tracks to all reconstructed ones.
Imperfect detector acceptance within \(|\eta |\ <\ \) 0.8 range is corrected with the mixed-event method, where trigger particles from one event are correlated with associated particles from different events. Thus, no physical correlations are present. The mixed-event correlation function has a typical triangular shape determined by the \(\eta \) acceptance. An example of this function is shown in the middle plot of Fig. 1 where a plateau is visible. This is caused by different ranges in \(\eta \) for trigger (\(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\)) and associated particles (h). The mixed-event correlation is already scaled to unity with a scaling factor equal to the average of bins with \(\Delta \eta \) = 0. In the following, the actual correlation function is divided by the mixed-event one to eliminate the detector acceptance effects as illustrated in Fig. 1. This correction is schematically written as \(1/\varepsilon _{\mathrm {pair}}\) in Eq. 1. In some cases, due to the finite binning in multiplicity and PV position in z-direction, the mixed-event correlation does not match the shape of the background perfectly. For this reason, a so called “wing“ correction is performed. Here the correlation function is scaled once more with a 2D distribution constant in \(\Delta \varphi \) and dependent on \(\Delta \eta \) in order to get a flat distribution in \(\Delta \eta \) at the away-side. This correction is never larger than 2% and only affects the h-h correlation function. A similar effect was observed also in a previous analysis [31].
Table 2 Summary of the main sources and values of the relative systematic uncertainties (expressed in %) for the per-trigger yields in the MB sample. The abbreviation “negl.“ stands for negligible (smaller than 0.1%) and “rej.“ means that this variation was rejected due to the Barlow criterion
For the reconstruction of \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\) mesons and \(\Lambda \)(\({\overline{\Lambda }}\)) baryons, some of the candidates selected with the topological criteria are in fact combinatorial background. Since the shape of the correlation function does not need to be the same for the signal and background, a second correlation function is calculated, where candidates from two intervals from outside the invariant mass peak (\(m_\mathrm {V^{0}}- 9\sigma \) to \(m_\mathrm {V^{0}}-6\sigma \) and \(m_\mathrm {V^{0}} +6\sigma \) to \(m_\mathrm {V^{0}} +9\sigma \)) are taken as trigger particles. These give the same width as the signal region in the invariant mass spectrum. The second “side-band“ correlation function is subtracted from the signal one. The number of trigger particles is in addition corrected for purity, defined as a ratio of number of signal \(\mathrm {V^{0}}\) candidates over all candidates within the invariant mass acceptance region.
In the case of \(\Lambda \)(\({\overline{\Lambda }}\)) being the trigger particle, the feed-down contribution from decays of \(\Xi \) baryons (reconstructed following [6]) baryons is subtracted in a similar way as for the combinatorial background. For this case, the \((\Xi ^-+{\overline{\Xi }}^+)\)-h correlation function in every \(p_{\mathrm T}\) and multiplicity bin is calculated, scaled with the detection efficiency of \(\Lambda \)(\({\overline{\Lambda }}\)) from \(\Xi \) decays and subtracted from the \((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\)-h correlation function. Similarly, the feed-down fraction is subtracted from the number of trigger particles. It is assumed that the production rates of charged and neutral \(\Xi \) baryons are equal and the feed-down fraction from \(\Omega \) is negligible. This correction has an effect of 5% on the final near-side yields for low \(p_{\mathrm T}\) and smaller than 1% for high \(p_{\mathrm T}\).
After projecting the per-trigger yield on the \(\Delta \varphi \) axis, the underlying event background is subtracted with the ZYAM (Zero Yield At Minimum) method [32]. The background is assumed to be flat and estimated as the average value of six bins outside the jet peaks to reduce the statistical fluctuations.
Systematic uncertainties
The sources of systematic uncertainties of the per-trigger yields in the minimum bias sample are listed in Table 2. These are estimated by varying track-selection criteria and other parameters in the analysis. The significance of each source of systematic uncertainty was checked according to the Barlow criterion [33]. Within this procedure a threshold value (1 \(\sigma \)) is set, based on which each variation can be checked, whether it is within statistical fluctuations or a real systematic difference. If a certain variation did not pass the test, this contribution was not accounted for in the total systematic uncertainty, which was calculated as a quadrature sum of the individual contributions. For the ratios of yields, the systematic uncertainties are calculated separately which causes cancellation of correlated uncertainties.
For the uncertainty related to the \(\Delta \varphi \) integration window, the window is varied around the nominal values (\(|\Delta \varphi |<~0.9\) and \(|\Delta \varphi -\pi |<1.4\)) within ±0.1. For the yields for the h-h correlations, on both near- and away-side, the contribution to the total uncertainty is around 0.4% for all multiplicity classes. For the yields for \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\)-h and \((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\)-h correlations, the value varies within 0.4–2% for both near- and away-side.
The PV selection along the z-axis (\(z_{\mathrm {vtx}}\)) is decreased from \(\pm 10\) cm to \(\pm 7\) cm from the interaction point in order to estimate the uncertainty connected to the detector acceptance effects. The uncertainty is smaller than 0.3% in all multiplicity classes for the yields from h-h correlation function. It is in the range 0.7–2.3% and 0.7–2.7% for the near-side yield in case of \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\)-h and \((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\)-h yields, respectively. For the away-side, this source contributes with 1.7–4.5% and 0.7–4.9% in case of \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\)-h and \((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\)-h yields, respectively.
The number of bins in \(z_{\mathrm {vtx}}\) used for the event-mixing classes is changed from 9 to 7 to account for the uncertainty connected with the detector acceptance. For the yields triggered with an unidentified hadron, the contribution from this source is smaller than 0.5% at both sides for all multiplicity classes. This uncertainty is in the range 0.5–2.7% and 0.4–1.5% for the near-side yield triggered with \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\) and \((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\), respectively and within 1.2–5.2% and 0.8–2.8% for the away-side.
The contribution to the systematic uncertainty resulting from the yield calculation method is estimated by fitting each jet peak with a double-gaussian function and integrating the fit function to calculate the per-trigger yield instead of calculating the yield directly by the bin counting method as default. This leads to an uncertainty around 1% for the near-side and to a value smaller than 0.2% for the away-side for the h-h yields in all multiplicity classes. For most multiplicity classes this source was rejected by the Barlow criterion for the \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\) trigger. The non-rejected contribution is 1.1% and 0.7% for the near- and away-side, respectively. The accounted contribution to the uncertainty of yields triggered with \((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\) is in the range 0.3–0.8% and 0.2–3.4% for the near-side and away-side yields, respectively.
For the variation of the underlying event subtraction method, which takes the average value of 6 bins from the left and right side of the near-side peak, a constant fit in ranges \([-\pi /2, -1]\) and \([1,\pi /2]\) is used, leading to an estimated uncertainty around 0.6% (1.5%), 2% (2.2%) and 1.8% (4.5%) for the near- (away- ) side yield from the unidentified hadron-, \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\)-, and \((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\)-triggered correlation functions, respectively.
The \(\Delta \eta \) range is varied within 0.1 around its nominal value \(|\Delta \eta |<1\) in order to estimate the uncertainty related to the near-side jet acceptance. This is estimated to be within 0.3–0.9%, 0.6–1.9%, 0.4–2.4% for h–h, \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\)–h and \((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\)–h yields in all multiplicity classes, respectively.
The scale factor for the mixed-event correlation function is varied, which gives a negligible contribution to the total systematic uncertainty for h–h yields for both sides. This contribution for \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\)–h (\((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\)–h) yields is estimated as 0.7–1.5% (0.2–0.4%) and 0.9–2% (0.2–0.5%) for the near and away-side yields, respectively, in different multiplicity classes.
In order to estimate the systematic uncertainty connected to the \(\mathrm {V^{0}}\) reconstruction, the values for the topological selection are varied around the nominal values. Its value is, for different multiplicity classes, in the range 1.5–5.8% (1.9–5.6%) and 2.2–7.5% (2–5.5%) for the \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\) \((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\) triggered yields at the near- and away-side, respectively.
The ranges for the signal and for background in the invariant mass distributions are varied in order to estimate the uncertainty related to the subtraction of the contribution from misidentified \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\) or \((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\). This source is rejected by the Barlow criterion for the \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\)–h yields and has a value in the range 0.5–3.9% and 1.1–4.3% for the \((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\)–h triggered yields, for the near- and away-side, respectively.
The systematic uncertainty associated with the primary track selections is estimated by selecting tracks with slightly varied criteria. These are the same as the ones used for global tracks, but there is a tighter and \(p_{\mathrm T}\)-dependent DCA requirement in the xy-plane, which means that tracks with a DCA in the xy-plane larger than \(0.0105+0.0350/p_{\mathrm T} ^{1.1}\) are rejected. This uncertainty is smaller than 0.7% for both the near- and away-side yield for h–h for all multiplicity classes. The uncertainty intervals for \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\) (\((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\)) triggered yields are estimated as 0.9–2.4% (0.4–3.5%) and 1.3–3.9% (0.2–3.1%) for the near- and away-side yields, respectively.
The range used for the estimation of the wing correction scaling factor is varied in order to calculate the uncertainty related to this method. This contribution is not dependent on the event multiplicity.
The \(\Xi ^-({\overline{\Xi }}^+)\) reconstruction uncertainty contributes to the uncertainty of yields triggered by \((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\). This contribution is estimated by varying the topological selection of \(\Xi ^-({\bar{\Xi }}^+)\) hyperons around their nominal values. This uncertainty is in the range 0.2–4% (0.2–3.9%) for the near(away)-side yields for events in all multiplicity classes.
The correction procedure is checked with a Monte Carlo closure test. Two correlation functions are calculated, the first one with generated MC particles and the second one with MC particles reconstructed after GEANT3 propagation using the full reconstruction and correction chain as for the experimental data. The ratio of these two correlation functions is expected to be unity. This is the case for the h–h and \(\mathrm {K_S}^{0}\)–h correlation functions, but there is a residual departure from unity for \((\Lambda +{\overline{\Lambda }})\)–h correlation function at the near-side of up to 2.5%, which is accounted as a systematic uncertainty.