The ASY-EOS experiment at GSI: investigating the symmetry energy at supra-saturation densities

The ASY-EOS experiment at GSI: investigating the
symmetry energy at supra-saturation densities

<D ■

^! P. Russotto 1 , M. Chartier 2 , E. De Filippo 1 , A. Le Fevre 3 ,

S. Gannon 2 , I. Gasparic 4 ' 5 , M. Kis 3 - 4 , S. Kupny 6 , Y. Leifels 3 ,

R.C. Lemmon 7 , J. Lukasik 8 , P. Marini 910 , A. Pagano 1 , P. Pawlowski 8 ,

i f S. Santoro 1112 , W. Trautmann 3 , M. Veselsky 13 , L. Acosta 14 ,

^; M. Adamczyk 6 , A. Al-Ajlan 15 , M. Al-Garawi 16 , S. Al-Homaidhi 15 ,

i . F. Amorini 14 , L. Auditore 1112 , T. Aumann 5 , Y. Ayyad 17 ,

V. Baran 1418 , Z. Basrak 4 , J. Benlliure 17 , C. Boiano 19 , M. Boisjoli 10 ,
K. Boretzky 3 , J. Brzychczyk 6 , A. Budzanowski 8 , G. Cardella 1 ,

lBj! P. Cammarata 9 , Z. Chajecki 20 , A. Chbihi 10 , M. Colonna 14 ,

D. Cozma 21 , B. Czech 8 , M. Di Toro 14 22 , M. Famiano 23 , E. Geraci 122 ,
V. Greco 14 22 , L. Grassi 4 , C. Guazzoni 19 ' 24 , P. Guazzoni 19 ' 25 , M. Heil 3 ,

7-H ! L. Heilborn 9 , R. Introzzi 26 , T. Isobe 27 , K. Kezzar 16 ,

■ A. Krasznahorkay 28 , N. Kurz 3 , E. La Guidara 1 , G. Lanzalone 14 29 ,

P. Lasko 6 , Q. Li 30 , I. Lombardo 30 ' 31 , W. G. Lynch 20 , Z. Matthews 2 ,
L. May 9 , T. Minniti 1112 , M. Mostazo 17 , M. Papa 1 , S. Pirrone 1 ,
G. Politi 1 - 22 , F. Porto 14 ' 22 , R. Reifarth 3 , W. Reisdorf 3 , F. Riccio 19 ' 25 ,

psj ! F. Rizzo 14 ' 22 , E. Rosato 30 ' 31 , D. Rossi 3 , H. Simon 3 , I. Skwirczynska 8 ,

Z. Sosin 6 , L. Stuhl 28 , A. Trinr6 1112 ,M. Trimarchi 1112 ,M. B. Tsang 20 ,
>! G. Verde 1 , M. Vigilante 30 ' 31 , A. Wieloch 6 , P. Wigg 2 , H. H. Wolter 32 ,

*£j ; P. Wu 2 , S. Yennello 9 , P. Zambon 19 ' 24 , L. Zetta 19 ' 25 and M. Zoric 4

5^ " 1 INFN-Sezione di Catania, Catania, Italy

2 University of Liverpool, Liverpool, UK
3 GSI Helmholtzzentrum, Darmstadt, Germany
4 Ruder Boskovic Institute, Zagreb, Croatia
5 Technische Universitat, Darmstadt, Germany
6 Jagiellonian University, Krakow, Poland
7 STFC Laboratory, Daresbury, UK
8 IFJ-PAN, Krakow, Poland
9 Texas A&M University, College Station, USA
10 GANIL, Caen, France

11 INFN-Gruppo Collegato di Messina, Messina, Italy
12 Universita di Messina, Messina, Italy

13 Institute of Physics, Slovak Academy of Sciences, Bratislava, Slovakia
14 INFN-Laboratori Nazionali del Sud, Catania, Italy
15 KACST Riyadh, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
16 King Saud University, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia

17 University of Santiago de Compostela, Santiago de Compostela, Spain

18 University of Bucharest, Bucharest, Romania

19 INFN-Sezione di Milano, Milano, Ialy

20 NSCL Michigan State University, East Lansing, USA

2 1 IFIN-HH , Magurele-Bucharest .Romania

22 Universita di Catania, Catania, Italy

Western Michigan University, USA
24 Politecnico di Milano, Milano, Italy
25 Universita degli Studi di Milano, Milano, Italy
26 INFN, Politecnico di Torino, Torino, Italy
27 RIKEN, Wako, Japan

28 Institute of Nuclear Research, Debrecen, Hungary
29 Universita Kore, Enna, Italy

Huzhou Teachers College, China
30 INFN-Sezione di Napoli, Napoli, Italy
31 Universita di Napoli, Napoli, Italy
32 LMU, Miinchen, Germany

E-mail: russotto@lns.infn.it

Abstract. The elliptic- flow ratio of neutrons with respect to protons in reactions of neutron
rich heavy-ions systems at intermediate energies has been proposed as an observable sensitive to
the strength of the symmetry term in the nuclear Equation Of State (EOS) at supra-saturation
densities. The recent results obtained from the existing FOPI/LAND data for 197 Au+ 197 Au
collisions at 400 MeV/nucleon in comparison with the UrQMD model allowed a first estimate of
the symmetry term of the EOS but suffer from a considerable statistical uncertainty. In order
to obtain an improved data set for Au+Au collisions and to extend the study to other systems,
a new experiment was carried out at the GSI laboratory by the ASY-EOS collaboration in May
2011.

1. Introduction

A key question in modern nuclear physics is the knowledge of the nuclear Equation Of State
(EOS) and, in particular, of its dependence on density and on asymmetry, i.e., on the relative
neutron-to-proton abundance. The EOS can be divided into a symmetric term (i.e., independent
of the isospin asymmetry I= ^~~_| , where N and Z are the numbers of neutrons and protons,
respectively) and an asymmetric term given by the symmetry energy, i.e. the difference between
the EOS for neutron matter and for symmetric one, multiplied by the square of the isospin
asymmetry I [1-5].

Measurements of isoscalar collective vibrations, collective flow and kaon production [1,4,6]
in energetic nucleus-nucleus collisions have constrained the behavior of the EOS of isospin
symmetric matter for densities up to five times the saturation density pq. On the other side,
the EOS of asymmetric matter is still subject to large uncertainties. Besides the astrophysical
interest, e.g. neutron star physics and supernovae dynamics [7,8], the density dependence of
the symmetry energy is of fundamental importance for nuclear physics. The thickness of the
neutron skin of heavy nuclei reflects the differential pressure exerted on the core [9] and the
strength of the three-body forces, an important ingredient in nuclear structure calculations [10],
represents one of the major uncertainties in modeling the EOS at high density [4, 11]. Moreover,
properties of nuclei away from the valley of stability and the dynamics of nuclear reactions at
Fermi energies rely on the density dependence of the symmetry energy [3, 5].
In the last decade, measurements of the Giant Monopole [12], Giant Dipole [13] and
Pygmy Dipole [14] resonances in neutron-rich nuclei, isospin diffusion [15,16], neutron and
proton emissions [17], fragment isotopic ratios [16,18,19], isospin dependence of competition
between deep-inelastic and incomplete fusion reactions [20], neutron enrichment of mid- velocity
fragments [21] have provided constraints on the density dependence of the symmetry energy
around and below saturation density po [22]. It results that the best description of experimental
data is obtained with a symmetry energy S(u) = C^™ , (u) 2 ^ + Cw™(u) 7 with 7 in the range
0.6-1.1 {u = p/po is the reduced nuclear density). In the near future, extensions of these

measurements with both stable and rare-isotope beams will provide further stringent constraints
at sub-saturation densities.

In contrast, up to now, very few experimental constraints exist on the symmetry energy at
supra-saturation densities (u > 1). This is the domain with the greatest theoretical uncertainty
and the largest interest for neutron stars. The behavior of the asymmetric EOS at supra-
saturation densities can only be explored in terrestrial laboratories by using relativistic heavy-ion
collisions of isospin asymmetric nuclei. Reaction simulations propose several potentially useful
observable such as neutron and proton flows (direct and elliptic) [3,5,23,24], neutron/proton
ratio [5, 16, 25-28], tt-/tt + ratio and flows [3, 5, 24, 28, 29], K+/K [30] and £"/£+ [29] ratios,
flow and yield of light charged particles, with special emphasis on isotope pairs (e.g. 3 H and
3 He, Li and Be) [3,5,27,28]. To this day the problem is still open, since few studies have
provided constraints on the behavior of the symmetry energy at supra-saturation densities (see
[31] for a review).

The single ratio ir~ /ir + was measured in 197 Au + 197 Au [32] and analyzed using the hadronic
transport model IBUU04 [33]. The results suggest that the symmetry energy is rather soft at
supra-saturation densities; this finding - symmetry energy reaches its maximum at a density
between po and 2po and then starts decreasing at higher densities - is not consistent with most
of the extrapolation near or below saturation density. The same set of FOPI data has been
analyzed in the framework of the IMproved Isospin dependent Quantum Molecular Dynamics
(ImlQMD) [34]; it results in a very stiff symmetry energy of the potential term proportional
to u 1 with 7 ~ 2. Moreover, work [35] suggests a reduced sensitivity of the ir~ /ir + ratio to
the symmetry energy. It follows that for the pion signal further work is needed to establish the
effectiveness in probing the symmetry energy. In-medium absorption and re-emission of pions
can distort the asymptotic experimental signal and it is not clear which density of matter is
explored by the pions signal. The analysis of another set of FOPI data is described in the next
section of this paper.

In addition, we want to remind the reader that the FOPI Collaboration has recently published
a complete systematic of direct and elliptic flows for Light Charged Particles (LCP) for 25
combinations of systems and energies [36], that represents an unique set of data to study
symmetry energy effects in flow and yield of LCP.

2. Neutron and proton elliptic flows

One of the most promising probe of the symmetry energy strength at supra-saturation densities
is the difference of the neutron and proton (or hydrogen) elliptic flows [37, 38]. This has emerged
firstly from calculations based on the Ultra-Relativistic Quantum Molecular Dynamics model
(UrQMD) [39]. We report here some results obtained using UrQMD for the Au + 197 Au
collision at 400 MeV/nucleon. The calculations have been performed using both Asy-Stiff
(7 = 1.5) and Asy-Soft (7 = 0.5) potential symmetry energies. The UrQMD predictions for
the elliptic flow of neutrons, protons and hydrogen as a function of rapidity in the laboratory
frame, Yj a &, for mid-peripheral collisions (impact parameter 5.5 < b < 7.5 fm) and for the two
choices of the density dependence of the symmetry energy, are shown in Fig. 1. We remind here
that direct (v±) and elliptic (t^) flows are obtained by the azimuthal particle distributions with
the usual Fourier expansion

f{A(j>) oc 1 + 2 ■ vi ■ cos(A(j)) + 2-V2- cos(2 ■ A<f>) (1)

with A<j) representing the azimuthal angle of the emitted particle with respect to the reaction
plane [40]. The dominant difference is the significantly larger neutron squeeze-out in the Asy-
Stiff case (upper panel) compared to the Asy-Soft case (lower panel). Neutron and proton
directed and elliptic flows were measured in 197 Au+ 197 Au collisions at 400 MeV/nucleon using
the LAND neutron detector and the FOPI Phase 1 forward wall [42]. We have reanalyzed the

-0.02

-0.04

-0.06

-0.08

-0.1

-0.02
-0.04
-0.06
-0.08
-0.1

■ 8 „

8

ASY-

STIFF

*

s

8

I o
a

o

o

o *

I

1 FOPI

A

a

o g

o o A

4 «

• n

Op

- Ah

i.i.

i.i.

Ah

i i

0.1 0.2

0.3

0.4

0.5 0.6

0.7 0.8

ASY-fJ'.FT

o 8

8 • •

o

A O

_l i I i I i 1_

0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8

Y

Figure 1. Elliptic flow parameter V2 for mid-peripheral (impact parameter 5.5 < b < 7.5
fm) 197 Au + 197 Au collisions at 400 MeV/nucleon as calculated with the UrQMD model for
neutrons (dots), protons (circles), and all hydrogen isotopes (Z=l, open triangles), integrated
over transverse momentum pt, as a function of the laboratory rapidity Yj a &. The predictions
obtained with a stiff and a soft density dependence of the symmetry term are given in the upper
and lower panels, respectively. The experimental result from Ref. [41] for Z = 1 particles at
mid-rapidity is represented by the filled triangle (the horizontal bar represents the experimental
rapidity interval); from [38].

data to extract the neutron and proton direct and elliptic flows [37, 38] . The results have been
compared with predictions of the UrQMD model with the aim of providing constraints on the
symmetry energy at supra-saturation densities. The dependence of the elliptic flow parameter
i>2 on the transverse momentum per nucleon, pt/A, is shown in Fig. 2, upper panel, for the
combined data set of collisions with impact parameter b < 7.5 fm; the impact parameter has been
estimated from the total charged particle multiplicity registered in the FOPI forward wall. For
the quantitative evaluation, the ratio of the flow parameters of neutrons versus hydrogen isotopes
has been used. The results for the ratio v^/v^ i.e. with respect to the integrated hydrogen
yield, are shown in Fig. 2 (lower panel). The experimental ratios, even though evaluated with
large errors, are found to scatter within the intervals given by the calculations for 7 = 0.5 and
1.5. Linear interpolations between the predictions, averaged over 0.3 < pt/A < 1.0 GeV/c,
yield 7 = 1.01 ± 0.21 for the exponent describing the density dependence of the potential term.
The same analysis has been also performed for a different parameterization of the momentum
dependence of the elastic in- medium nucleon- nucleon cross section [43], for the V2 ratios of free
neutrons with respect to free protons, and for different bins of impact parameter, resulting in
a preliminary value of 7 = 0.9 ± 0.3. However, due to the limited statistic, a more accurate
extrapolation of the symmetry energy is not possible.

In an independent analysis, Cozma used data from the same experiment and investigated the
influence of several parameters on the difference between the elliptic flows of protons and
neutrons using the Tubingen version of the QMD transport model [44]. They included the
parametrization of the isoscalar EoS, the choice of various forms of free or in-medium nucleon-
nucleon cross sections, and model parameters as, e.g., the widths of the wave packets representing

00
-0.05

>

-0.10
-0 15

1.0

>

V* 0.5

0.0

02 4 0.6 0.8 1.0

p t /A IGeV/c)

Figure 2. Differential elliptic now parameters t>2 for neutrons (dots) and hydrogen isotopes
(open triangles, top panel) and their ratio (lower panels) for moderately central (b < 7.5/m)
collisions of 197 Au + 197 Au at 400 MeV/nucleon, as a function of the transverse momentum per
nucleon pt/A. The symbols represent the experimental data. The UrQMD predictions for 7
= 1.5 (Asy-Stiff) and 7= 0.5 (Asy-Soft) obtained for neutrons (top panel) and for the ratio
(bottom panel) are given by the dashed lines; adapted from [38].

nucleons. The interaction used by Cozma contains an explicit momentum dependence of the
symmetry energy part. Both the difference and the ratio of neutron and proton elliptic flows
are found to be sensitive to the density dependence of the symmetry energy; comparing the
predictions to the FOPI/LAND data in [44], the best description is obtained with a density
dependence dependence slightly stiffer than the 7 = 0.5 case; it is thus rather close to the
UrQMD result 7 = 0.9 which may represent an important step towards the model invariance
with respect to different treatment of the nucleon-nucleon cross sections used in the two studies
and to the explicit momentum dependence of the isovector potentials which is implemented in
the Tubingen QMD but not in the UrQMD version.

However, it is obvious that data with higher statistical precision are highly desirable, since it
allows following the evolutions of isospin signals with impact parameter, transverse momentum
and particle type more accurately. Moreover better data would be important to study isospin
effects on the momentum dependence of the in- medium interactions [45].

3. ASY-EOS (S394) experiment at GSI

In May 2011 the data taking of experiment S394 at GSI has been completed. The symmetric
collision systems 197 Au + 197 Au, 96 Zr + 96 Zr and 96 Ru + 96 Ru at 400 MeV/nucleon incident
energies have been measured. With the new experiment, an attempt is being made to
considerably improve the previous set of data, by improving the statistical accuracy of the
measured flow parameters for Au+Au reactions, and to extend the flow measurements to other
systems. Indeed the study of isospin effects can be improved using new observable like the one
related to light fragments up to atomic number Z=4, with special emphasis on the light isobar
pairs 3 H/ 3 He and 7 Li/ 7 Be.

weighted mean j - 1.01(21)

J I I I I I I I L

Figure 3. Floor plan (left) and view in beam direction (right) of the experimental setup showing
the covered CHIMERA (cylinder), the frame of the ToF-Wall (behind) and LAND (large black
cube to the right).

A schematic view and a photo of experimental set-up are shown in Fig. 3. The beam was
guided in vacuum to about 2 m upstream from the target. A thin plastic foil read by two
photo-multipliers was used to tag in time the beam arrival and acted as a start detector for the
time-of- flight measurement.

The Large Area Neutron Detector (LAND) [46], recently upgraded with new TACQUILA GSI-
ASIC electronics, was positioned at laboratory angles around 45° with respect to the beam
direction, at a distance of about 5 m from the target. A veto-wall of plastic scintillators in front
of LAND allows discrimination of neutrons and charged particles. In such a way it is possible to
measure the direct and elliptic collective flows of neutrons and hydrogens at mid-rapidity with
high precision in the same angular acceptance.

In addition, Krakow Triple Telescope Array, KraTTA [47], has been built to measure the energy,
emission angles and isotopic composition of light charged reaction products. It performed very
well during the experiment. The 35 modules of KraTTA, arranged in a 7x5 array, were placed
opposite to LAND at the distance of 40 cm from the target, and covered 160 msr of the solid
angle, at polar angles between 20° and 64°. The modules of KraTTA, shown in panel a) of
Fig. 3 consisted of two, optically decoupled, CsI(Tl) crystals (thickness of 2.5 and 12.5 cm)
and three large area, 500 fim thick, PIN photo-diodes. The first photo-diode served as a Si
AE detector and supplied the ionization signal alone. The second one worked in a Single Chip
Telescope configuration and provided both the ionization signal and the light output from the
thin crystal. The third photo-diode read out the light from the thick crystal. The signals from
the photo-diodes were integrated by custom-made low-noise charge preamplifiers and digitized
with 100 MHz, CAEN V1724 digitizers. Very good isotopic resolution has been obtained in the
whole dynamic range (see [47]). As an example panel b) of Fig. 4 shows a AE-E scatter plot
from the KraTTA detector; an isotopic resolution up to Z=6 is clearly visible.
The determination of the impact parameter and the orientation of the reaction plane required
the use of several devices:

i) the ALADIN Time-of-Flight wall [48] was used to detect forward emitted charged particles
at polar angles smaller than 7°; two walls (front and rear) of 2.5*100 cm 2 plastic scintillators,
read by two photo-multipliers at both ends, gave information on emission angle, atomic number
and velocity of ions. A Time Of Flight vs AE scatter plot is shown in panel d) of Fig. 3, for
a single scintillator; the different elements can be easily separated. The obtained time of flight
resolution, with respect to the start detector, varied with Z, smoothly decreasing from ~ 250 ps
(standard deviation) for lithium fragments to ~ 100 ps for fragments with Z> 10 [49].

3000

20

E [channels]

18

TOFvsADCslat37

2500

16

(ns)

"6 2000

- 14

2 1500

8
tt.

1000

500

200 401 600 SOO 1000 1200 1400 1300 1S00 2000

(channel)

500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500

Slow (channels)

Figure 4. Schematic view of a KraTTA module (a) and scatter plots from Au+Au reactions
at 400 MeV/nucleon: AE-E (Csl vs. Csl) from KraTTA (b); fast- vs. -slow components from a
CHIMERA CsI(Tl) scintillator placed at a polar angle 9i ab ~ 17° (c); time-of-flight vs. AE from
a ToF-Wall detector (d).

ii) 50 thin (~ 1 cm thick) CsI(Tl) elements, read out by photo-diodes, arranged in 4 rings
of the Washington-University ^-ball array [50], covering polar angles between 60° and 147°,
surrounded the target with the aim of measuring the distribution of backward emitted particles
and to discriminate against background reactions on non-target material;

hi) 352 CsI(Tl) scintillators, 12 cm thick, of the CHIMERA multidetector [51], arranged in 8
rings in 2ir azimuthal coverage around the beam axis, covered polar angles between 7° and 20°,
measuring the emission of light charged particles. In addition, thin (300 /iin) Silicon detectors
were placed in front of 32 (4 by ring) Csl detectors in the usual AE-E configuration. Identification
of particles in CHIMERA CsI(Tl) has been performed using Pulse Shape Analysis based on
standard fast-slow techniques; an example is shown in panel c) of Fig. 4. We have obtained
isotopic identification for p,d,t and 3 ' 4 He ions stopped in the Csl detectors. Particles punching
through the CsI(Tl) can be distinguished from stopped particles and identified, however only in
atomic number Z; the difference in ionization densities dE/dx between stopped and punching
through ions results in a sufficiently different fast/slow ratio. At the lowest fast and slow values
an intense ridge due to gamma, fast electrons, neutrons interaction in the detector medium
and background reactions on non-target material is found. For particles heavier than helium,
the slow component is partially saturated, since the gate width for the Csl slow component
has been chosen in order to compromise between a good separation of hydrogen isotopes and
identification of Li/Be ions within the codifier's maximum energy range. The identification in
Csl has been cross-checked with the one obtained in the 32 Si-Csl telescopes via AE-E technique.
In addition, a digital acquisition sampling technique (14 bit, 50 MHz sampling frequency) was
used, in parallel to the standard analog one, in about 10 % of the detectors. Cross checking

Figure 5. panel a): transverse velocity versus rapidity in lab reference system for particles
detected by CHIMERA and /x-ball array for Au+Au data at 400 MeV/nucleon; panel b):
correlation between total transverse energy of light charged particles and multiplicity in
CHIMERA.

of identification between the standard analog and the digital DAQ has been of fundamental
importance; more results are given in [52]. Energy calibration of the fast component has been
performed via the evaluation of the punching through points. For particles punching through the
detectors, the total kinetic energy has been evaluated from the measured AE using energy-loss
tables.

With beam intensities of about 10 5 pps and targets of 1-2% interaction probability, about 5 * 10 6
events for each system were collected. Special runs were performed with and without target,
in order to measure the background from interaction of projectile ions with air, and with iron
shadow bars covering the angular acceptance of LAND in order to measure neutron background.
Data acquisition was performed using the MBS data acquisition system available at GSI [53];
the CHIMERA data acquisition was integrated into the MBS system using the time-stamping
technique for data synchronization. The analysis of the collected data has been started with
calibrations of the individual detector systems and with overall quality checks, and is currently
in progress. At the present stage we will report here only on some preliminary results.
As a global result we show in panel a) of Fig. 5 the transverse velocity vs rapidity in the
lab reference system for the Au+Au system, for particles detected by CHIMERA and ^t-ball
detector. In the case of ^-ball, since energy calibration is not available, we simulated a uniform
kinetic energy distribution between and 75 MeV; in the figure we can clearly see population of
two intense regions around mid-rapidity and projectile rapidity. In order to reject fast electrons
and background, a threshold of E/A>25 MeV/nucleon has been imposed in CHIMERA.
It is interesting to look at the the evolution of kinematic distributions with increasing collision
violence; as a first test, we have used the total transverse energy of light charged particles,
Ej? = E l Kin * sin 2 (9i)(Zi < 2) as an estimator of collision violence. The correlation between
Ej? and total charged particle multiplicity in CHIMERA is shown in panel b) of Fig. 5. The 1 st
row of Fig. 6 shows the evolution of the transverse velocity vs. rapidity scatter plots for particles
detected by CHIMERA for different selections of Ej?; the collision violence increases from left
to right. An important parameter is the resolution achieved in determining the azimuthal
orientation of the reaction plane, that largely determines the uncertainty associated with the
determined flow parameters [40] . As a first test we have estimated the reaction plane orientation
for events with total charged particle multiplicity M>4 in CHIMERA, using the Q- vector method
of Ref. [54]. In order to reject the mid-rapidity region, a cut on laboratory rapidity Y^ >0.548
(corresponding to Y >0.1 in cm. system) was used. The obtained reaction plane distribution
for a CHIMERA data sample from the Au+Au data set, for different selection of Ej?, is shown

Figure 6. CHIMERA data for Au+Au system; 1 row: evolution of transverse velocity versus
rapidity in lab reference system for different selection of Ej?; 2 nd row: orientation of reaction
plane obtained using Q-vector method for different selection of E^?; 3 rd row: difference of
orientations of reaction plane as obtained using sub-events mixing technique. Value of the
reaction plane dispersion parameter \ ( see [55]) are reported.

Au+Au a) Au+no Target b)

Figure 7. Correlation between reaction plane orientation as given by CHIMERA (x axis) and
/u-ball (y axis) for for Au+Au data (panel a) and for Au+no target data (panel b); difference of
the two reaction plane orientations (CHIMERA minus /u-ball) for Au+Au data and for Au+no
target data (panel c), normalized to the integrated beam intensity.

in 2 row of Fig. 6; the flatness indicates that the particle angular distributions have not

been biased by the event triggering in the experiment. We also tested the resolution achieved
in reconstructing the reaction plane using the sub-event mixing technique of Ref. [55]. The
distribution of the difference between the two reaction plane orientations extracted by the sub-
events is reported in the 3 rd row of Fig. 6. Using the method of [55] we obtain a reaction
plane dispersion parameter x ~0.90 for 200 < Ej? < AOOMeV, resulting in an attenuation of
the elliptic flow measurement of ~ 0.34, and a x ~l-7 for Etyi > GOOMeV, corresponding to
an attenuation of ~ 0.66. this has been estimated from Fig. 4 of [55] which shows correction
factors for the Fourier parameters of the azimuthal distribution v n of order n as a function
of x- I n the case of low dissipative collisions (E^r < 200MeU), most of the particles from
projectile fragmentation are hitting the ToF-Wall detector. The very low multiplicities (<~ 4)
of particles detected by CHIMERA do not permit an accurate determination of the reaction plane
orientation. However, the analysis performed so far shows that the reaction plane orientation
achieved with the CHIMERA detector modules is better than the one estimated in simulations.
It is to be expected that these values will improve considerably as soon as the information
collected with the Time-of-Flight wall can be included in the analysis. In Fig. 7 we show the
correlation between reaction plane orientations as determined by CHIMERA and /x-ball subset of
data for Au+Au reactions (panel a) and Au+no target data (panel b); a nice anti-correlation is
found for on-target reaction, since the two devices detect particles in the opposite hemispheres
(projectile and target); the data collected without target shows a spurious background. The
difference between the two reaction plane orientations, normalized to the integrated beam
intensity, is presented in panel c), showing how the reaction on non target materials can be
discriminated by on-target reaction; this proves the usefulness of /i-ball data in rejecting the
background reactions.

4. Acknowledgements

Work supported by EU under contract No. FP7-25431 (Hadron-Physics2). One of us (S.K.)
acknowledges support by the Foundation for Polish Science-MPD program, co-financed by the
European Union within the European Regional Development Fund.

References

[I] Danielewicz P et al. Science 298, 1592 (2002).

[2] Lattimer J M and Prakash M Science 304, 536 (2004).

[3] Baran V et al. Phys. Rep. 410, 335 (2005).

[4] Fuchs C and Wolter H H Eur. Phys. J. A 30, 5 (2006).

[5] Li Bao-An et al. Phys. Rep. 464, 113 (2008).

[6] Youngblood D H et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 82, 691 (1999).

[7] Lattimer J M and Prakash M Phys. Rep. 333, 121 (2000).

[8] Botvina A S and Mishustin I N Phys. Lett. B 584, 233 (2004).

[9] Horowitz C J and Piekarewicz J Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5647 (2001) .

[10] Wiringa R B and Pieper S C Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 182501 (2002).

[II] Xu Chang and Li Bao-An Phys. Rev. C 81, 064612 (2010).
[12] Li T et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 99, 162503 (2007).

[13] Trippa L et al. Phys. Rev. C 77, 061304 (2008).
[14] Klimkiewicz A et al. Phys. Rev. C 76, 051603 (2007).
[15] Tsang M B et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 92, 062701 (2004).
[16] Tsang MB et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 122701 (2009).
[17] Famiano M et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 052701 (2009).
[18] Iglio J et al. Phys. Rev. C 74, 024605 (2006).
[19] Tsang M B et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 5023 (2001).
[20] Amorini F et al. Phys. Rev. Lett 102, 112701 (2009).
[21] De Filippo E et al. Phys. Rev. C 86, 014610 (2012).
[22] Tsang M B et al. Phys. Rev. C 86, 015803 (2012).
[23] Greco V et al. Phys. Lett. B 562, 215 (2003).

[24] Yong G-C et al. Phys. Rev. C 74, 064617 (2006); Yong G-C et al, Phys. Rev. C 73, 034603 (2006).

[25] Li Bao-An et al. Phys. Lett. B 634, 378 (2006).

[26] Li Q et al. Phys. Rev. C 73, 051601 (2006).

[27] Kumar S et al. Phys. Rev. C 85, 024620 (2012)

[28] Feng Z-Q Phys. Lett. B 707, 803 (2012).

[29] Li Q et al. Phys. Rev. C 71, 054907 (2005).

[30] Ferini G et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 97, 202301 (2006).

[31] Trautmann W and Wolter H H Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 21, 1230003 (2012).

[32] Reisdorf W et al. Nucl. Phys. A 781, 459 (2007).

[33] Xiao Z et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 102, 062502 (2009).

[34] Feng Zhao-Qing and Jin Zhao-Qing Phys. Lett. B 683, 140 (2010).

[35] Li Q et al. J. Phys. G 32, 407 (2006).

[36] Reisdorf W et al. Nucl. Phys. A 876, 1 (2012).

[37] Trautmann W et al. Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 62, 425 (2009); Trautmann W et al., Int. J. Mod. Phys. E 19,
1653 (2010).

[38] Russotto P et al. Phys. Lett. B 697, 471 (2011).

[39] see UrQMD homepage, www.urqmd.org.

[40] Andronic A et al. Eur. Phys. J. A 30, 31 (2008).

[41] Andronic A et al. Phys. Lett. B 612, 173 (2005).

[42] Leifels Y et al. Phys. Rev. Lett. 71, 963 (1993); Lambrecht D et al, Z. Phys. A 350 115 (1994).

[43] Li Q et al. Mod. Phys. Lett. A 9, 669 (2010).

[44] Cozma M D Phys. Lett. B 700, 139 (2011).

[45] Giordano V et al, Phys. Rev. C 81, 044611 (2011).

[46] Blaich Th et al. Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 314, 136 (1992).

[47] Lukasik J et al. Proceedings of IWM2011, EPJ Web of Conferences 31, 00032 (2012) and refs therein.

[48] Schiittauf A et al. Nucl. Phys. A 607, 457 (1996).

[49] Ogul R et al, Phys. Rev. C 83, 024608 (2011).

[50] Sarantites D G et al. Nucl. Instr. and Meth. A 381, 418 (1996) .

[51] Pagano A et al. Nucl. Phys. A 734, 504 (2004) .

[52] Acosta L et al. Contribuition to 2011 IEEE Nucl. Scie. Symp. (2011).

[53] http://www-win.gsi.de/daq.

[54] Danielewicz P et et al. Phys. Lett. B 157, 146 (1985).

[55] Ollitrault J-Y arxiv:nucl-ex/971 1003.