4.2 Article Proceedings Paper

Revisiting Bayesian constraints on the transport coefficients of QCD

Journal

NUCLEAR PHYSICS A
Volume 1005, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.nuclphysa.2020.121749

Keywords

shear viscosity; bulk viscosity; QCD; heavy ion collisions

Funding

  1. U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) [DE-FG02-05ER41367]
  2. National Science Foundation (NSF) [ACI-1550300]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Multistage models based on relativistic viscous hydrodynamics have been successful in describing hadron measurements from relativistic nuclear collisions, with Bayesian analyses providing systematic constraints on the viscosities of QCD. This manuscript discusses recent developments in Bayesian analyses of heavy ion collision data, emphasizing the importance of closure tests and the role of emulators as proxies for multistage theoretical models. The ongoing Bayesian analysis of soft hadron measurements by the JETSCAPE Collaboration is used as context for the discussion.
Multistage models based on relativistic viscous hydrodynamics have proven successful in describing hadron measurements from relativistic nuclear collisions. These measurements are sensitive to the shear and the bulk viscosities of QCD and provide a unique opportunity to constrain these transport coefficients. Bayesian analyses can be used to obtain systematic constraints on the viscosities of QCD, through methodical model-to-data comparisons. In this manuscript, we discuss recent developments in Bayesian analyses of heavy ion collision data. We highlight the essential role of closure tests in validating a Bayesian analysis before comparison with measurements. We discuss the role of the emulator that is used as proxy for the multistage theoretical model. We use an ongoing Bayesian analysis of soft hadron measurements by the JETSCAPE Collaboration as context for the discussion.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available