Jet quenching for hadron-tagged jets in pA𝑝𝐴pAitalic_p italic_A collisions

B.G. Zakharov L.D. Landau Institute for Theoretical Physics, GSP-1, 117940,
Kosygina Str. 2, 117334 Moscow, Russia
(July 2, 2024)
Abstract

We calculate the medium modification factor IpAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝐴I_{pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for 5.02 TeV p𝑝pitalic_p+Pb collisions. We use the Monte-Carlo Glauber model to determine the parameters of the quark-gluon plasma fireball in pA𝑝𝐴pAitalic_p italic_A jet events. Our calculations show that the jet quenching effect for IpAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝐴I_{pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT turns out to be rather small. We have found that the theoretical IpAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝐴I_{pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT as a function of the underlying event charged multiplicity density, within errors, agrees with data from ALICE ALICE_Ipp_PLB for 5.02 TeV p𝑝pitalic_p+Pb collisions. However, the experimental errors are too large to draw a firm conclusion on the possible presence of jet quenching.

Introduction. The transverse flow effects and the strong suppression of high-pTsubscript𝑝𝑇p_{T}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT hadron spectra (jet quenching) observed in AA𝐴𝐴AAitalic_A italic_A collisions at RHIC and the LHC are strong evidence for formation of the quark-gluon plasma (QGP) (for reviews see, e.g., hydro2 ; hydro3 ; JQ_rev ). The results of hydrodynamic modeling of the flow effects hydro2 ; hydro3 and of the jet quenching analyses of the heavy ion data on the nuclear modification factor RAAsubscript𝑅𝐴𝐴R_{AA}italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (see, e.g., CUJET3 ; Armesto_LHC ; Z_hl ) are consistent with the onset of the collective/hydrodynamic behavior of the QCD matter at the proper time τ00.51similar-tosubscript𝜏00.51\tau_{0}\sim 0.5-1italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∼ 0.5 - 1 fm. Although the dynamics of the QCD matter in AA𝐴𝐴AAitalic_A italic_A collisions was under active investigation in the last years for the weak and strong coupling scenarios (for reviews see, e.g., Teaney1 ; Strickland1 ; chesler1 ), the mechanism of the early hydrodynamization of the QGP is not well understood yet. The observation of the QGP formation in AA𝐴𝐴AAitalic_A italic_A collisions has sparked new interest in the idea of the QGP formation for small systems Shuryak_QGP . The analysis of Chesler2 in the scenario of the strongly coupled QGP shows that even the smallest droplet of the QCD matter produced in pp/pA𝑝𝑝𝑝𝐴pp/pAitalic_p italic_p / italic_p italic_A collisions can be described within hydrodynamics. In Spalinski it was argued that for pp/pA𝑝𝑝𝑝𝐴pp/pAitalic_p italic_p / italic_p italic_A collisions the lower bound for applicability of hydrodynamical description is dNch/dη3similar-to𝑑subscript𝑁𝑐𝑑𝜂3dN_{ch}/d\eta\sim 3italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η ∼ 3. This is close to the estimate of RMK1609 .

Experimentally, the formation of a mini QGP in pp/pA𝑝𝑝𝑝𝐴pp/pAitalic_p italic_p / italic_p italic_A collisions is supported by the observation of the ridge effect CMS_ridge ; ATLAS_mbias ; ATLAS_ridgepA ; ALICE_ridgepA in pp/pA𝑝𝑝𝑝𝐴pp/pAitalic_p italic_p / italic_p italic_A collisions at the LHC energies and by the steep growth of the midrapidity strange particle production at charged multiplicity dNch/dη >5 >𝑑subscript𝑁𝑐𝑑𝜂5dN_{ch}/d\eta\mathrel{\hbox to0.0pt{\lower 4.0pt\hbox{\hskip 1.0pt$\sim$}\hss}% \raise 1.0pt\hbox{$>$}}5italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η ∼> 5 ALICE_strange . The earlier analysis Camp1 of pTdelimited-⟨⟩subscript𝑝𝑇\langle p_{T}\rangle⟨ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ as a function of multiplicity, employing Van Hove’s arguments VH also supports the onset of QGP regime at such charged multiplicity density. There were suggested alternative non-hydrodynamical explanations of the ridge effect in pp/pA𝑝𝑝𝑝𝐴pp/pAitalic_p italic_p / italic_p italic_A collisions Kovner_ridge1 ; Dumitru_ridge1 ; ridge_CGC due to the initial state parton effects. However, these models do not explain the anomalous variation with the charged multiplicity density of the midrapidity strange particle production and of pTdelimited-⟨⟩subscript𝑝𝑇\langle p_{T}\rangle⟨ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩.

Besides the generation of the flow effects, the QGP formation in pp/pA𝑝𝑝𝑝𝐴pp/pAitalic_p italic_p / italic_p italic_A collisions should lead to jet modification due to parton energy loss in the QGP fireball. It is important that the typical charged multiplicity of soft (underlying event (UE)) hadrons in jet events is bigger than the ordinary minimum bias multiplicity by a factor of 22.5similar-toabsent22.5\sim 2-2.5∼ 2 - 2.5 Field . For the LHC energies the typical midrapidity charged multiplicity in pp𝑝𝑝ppitalic_p italic_p jet events dNch/dη1015similar-to𝑑subscript𝑁𝑐𝑑𝜂1015dN_{ch}/d\eta\sim 10-15italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η ∼ 10 - 15. One of the possible experimental methods to probe jet quenching in the small size QGP produced in pp/pA𝑝𝑝𝑝𝐴pp/pAitalic_p italic_p / italic_p italic_A collisions is investigation of the UE multiplicity dependence of the jet fragmentation functions (FFs) for photon/hadron tagged jets Z_pp_PRL described by the modification factors Ipp/pAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝑝𝑝𝐴I_{pp/pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p / italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Formally, Ipp,pAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝑝𝑝𝐴I_{pp,pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p , italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT can be defined as the ratio of the per-trigger particle (htsuperscript𝑡h^{t}italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT) yield of the associated hadron (hasuperscript𝑎h^{a}italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT) production, Ypp,pAsubscript𝑌𝑝𝑝𝑝𝐴Y_{pp,pA}italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p , italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, to the yield for pp𝑝𝑝ppitalic_p italic_p collisions calculated without the medium effects, Ypp0superscriptsubscript𝑌𝑝𝑝0Y_{pp}^{0}italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. However, Ypp0superscriptsubscript𝑌𝑝𝑝0Y_{pp}^{0}italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is unobservable quantity. For this reason, it is convenient to characterize the medium effects in pc𝑝𝑐pcitalic_p italic_c collisions in terms of the UE multiplicity dependence of the ratio of the experimental yields Ypcsubscript𝑌𝑝𝑐Y_{pc}italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and the average yield for pp𝑝𝑝ppitalic_p italic_p collisions Yppdelimited-⟨⟩subscript𝑌𝑝𝑝\langle Y_{pp}\rangle⟨ italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩

Ypc({pT},{y})Ypp({pT},{y}),subscript𝑌𝑝𝑐subscript𝑝𝑇𝑦delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝑌𝑝𝑝subscript𝑝𝑇𝑦\frac{Y_{pc}(\{p_{T}\},\{y\})}{\langle Y_{pp}(\{p_{T}\},\{y\})\rangle}\,,divide start_ARG italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( { italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } , { italic_y } ) end_ARG start_ARG ⟨ italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( { italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } , { italic_y } ) ⟩ end_ARG , (1)

where {pT}=(pTa,pTt)subscript𝑝𝑇superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑇𝑎superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑇𝑡\{p_{T}\}=(p_{T}^{a},p_{T}^{t}){ italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } = ( italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) and {y}=(ya,yt)𝑦superscript𝑦𝑎superscript𝑦𝑡\{y\}=(y^{a},y^{t}){ italic_y } = ( italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) are the sets of the transverse momenta and rapidities of the trigger particle and the associated hadron, and delimited-⟨⟩\langle...\rangle⟨ … ⟩ means averaging over the UE multiplicity. In terms of the modification factors Ipcsubscript𝐼𝑝𝑐I_{pc}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (defined via the unobservable yield Ypp0superscriptsubscript𝑌𝑝𝑝0Y_{pp}^{0}italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT) the ratio (1) should be equal to the ratio Ipc/Ippsubscript𝐼𝑝𝑐delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝐼𝑝𝑝I_{pc}/\langle I_{pp}\rangleitalic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ⟨ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩. Recently, the ALICE collaboration ALICE_Ipp ; ALICE_Ipp_PLB measured the UE multiplicity dependence of the ratio (1) for the hadron tagged jets in pp𝑝𝑝ppitalic_p italic_p and p𝑝pitalic_p+Pb collisions at s=5.02𝑠5.02\sqrt{s}=5.02square-root start_ARG italic_s end_ARG = 5.02 TeV. The ALICE ALICE_Ipp_PLB measurement has been performed for the hadron momenta 8<pTt<158superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑇𝑡158<p_{T}^{t}<158 < italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT < 15 GeV, 4<pTa<64superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑇𝑎64<p_{T}^{a}<64 < italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT < 6 GeV, and the UE activity has been characterized by the charged multiplicity NchTsuperscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑇N_{ch}^{T}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT in the transverse kinematical region π/3|ϕ|2π/3𝜋3italic-ϕ2𝜋3\pi/3\leq|\phi|\leq 2\pi/3italic_π / 3 ≤ | italic_ϕ | ≤ 2 italic_π / 3, |η|<0.8𝜂0.8|\eta|<0.8| italic_η | < 0.8, and pT>0.5subscript𝑝𝑇0.5p_{T}>0.5italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > 0.5 GeV. As compared to the UE charged multiplicity density dNchue/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{ue}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η, defined in the whole ϕitalic-ϕ\phiitalic_ϕ and pTsubscript𝑝𝑇p_{T}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT regions for the pseudorapidity window |η|<0.5𝜂0.5|\eta|<0.5| italic_η | < 0.5, NchTsuperscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑇N_{ch}^{T}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT of ALICE_Ipp ; ALICE_Ipp_PLB is smaller by a factor of 4.4absent4.4\approx 4.4≈ 4.4. For pp𝑝𝑝ppitalic_p italic_p collisions, in Z_Ipp it was found that Ippsubscript𝐼𝑝𝑝I_{pp}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT decreases by about 7-10% with increase of the UE activity in the range 5 <dNch/dη <20 <5𝑑subscript𝑁𝑐𝑑𝜂 <205\mathrel{\hbox to0.0pt{\lower 4.0pt\hbox{\hskip 1.0pt$\sim$}\hss}\raise 1.0pt% \hbox{$<$}}dN_{ch}/d\eta\mathrel{\hbox to0.0pt{\lower 4.0pt\hbox{\hskip 1.0pt$% \sim$}\hss}\raise 1.0pt\hbox{$<$}}205 ∼< italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η ∼< 20 for the jet quenching calculated within the light-cone path integral formalism LCPI1 ; LCPI2004 ; RAA04 ; RAA08 for the induced gluon emission. The results of ALICE_Ipp for Ipp/Ippsubscript𝐼𝑝𝑝delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝐼𝑝𝑝I_{pp}/\langle I_{pp}\rangleitalic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ⟨ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ agree qualitatively with calculations of Z_Ipp . It would be interesting to perform calculation of IpAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝐴I_{pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and comparison with data from ALICE_Ipp_PLB as well. The data of ALICE_Ipp_PLB for YpAsubscript𝑌𝑝𝐴Y_{pA}italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT also show a tendency of some decrease of YpAsubscript𝑌𝑝𝐴Y_{pA}italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT with increasing the UE charged multiplicity. But the effect seems to be somewhat smaller, at least visually, than that observed for pp𝑝𝑝ppitalic_p italic_p collisions. However, one should bear in mind that in the case of pA𝑝𝐴pAitalic_p italic_A collisions the observed UE charged multiplicity density may contain a considerable fraction of hadrons that come from interaction of the projectile with peripheral nucleons without the formation of the collective QCD matter. Because interaction with the peripheral nucleons may produce low density/entropy parton system, for which the energy/entropy density is not large enough to form the QGP. Thus, one can expect that the fireball of the QCD matter in pA𝑝𝐴pAitalic_p italic_A collisions should have the core-corona structure (discussed previously for AA𝐴𝐴AAitalic_A italic_A collisions corona1 ). The effect of hadrons from the corona region on jet quenching should be small since these hadrons should be in the free streaming regime. For this reason, for the jet quenching calculation of the variation of IpAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝐴I_{pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT with the observed UE charged multiplicity dNchue/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{ue}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η one needs a formalism for accounting for the difference between the observed dNchue/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{ue}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η and the charged multiplicity related to formation of the QGP fireball (which we denote by dNchf/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑓𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{f}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η). In the present paper we perform such jet quenching calculations of IpAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝐴I_{pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for conditions of the ALICE experiment ALICE_Ipp using the Monte-Carlo (MC) Glauber model for calculation of the QGP fireball parameters as a function of the total UE charged multiplicity density. The parameters of the QGP fireball depends on the free parameters of the MC Glauber model. However, our results demonstrate that predictions for IpAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝐴I_{pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT turn out to be quite stable to the theoretical uncertainties of the MC Glauber scheme.

Theoretical framework for calculation of IpAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝐴I_{pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. Similarly to AA𝐴𝐴AAitalic_A italic_A collisions Wang_di-h ; PHENIX_di-h , the per-trigger yield YpAsubscript𝑌𝑝𝐴Y_{pA}italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for production of the trigger hadron htsuperscript𝑡h^{t}italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and the associated hadron hasuperscript𝑎h^{a}italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT can be written via the di-hadron (back-to-back) and one-hadron inclusive pN𝑝𝑁pNitalic_p italic_N cross sections as

YpA({pT},{y})=d4σpNdpTadpTtdyadyt/d2σpNdpTtdyt,subscript𝑌𝑝𝐴subscript𝑝𝑇𝑦delimited-⟨⟩superscript𝑑4subscript𝜎𝑝𝑁𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑇𝑎𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑇𝑡𝑑superscript𝑦𝑎𝑑superscript𝑦𝑡superscript𝑑2subscript𝜎𝑝𝑁𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑇𝑡𝑑superscript𝑦𝑡Y_{pA}(\{p_{T}\},\{y\})=\left\langle\frac{d^{4}\sigma_{pN}}{dp_{T}^{a}dp_{T}^{% t}dy^{a}dy^{t}}\Big{/}\frac{d^{2}\sigma_{pN}}{dp_{T}^{t}dy^{t}}\right\rangle\,,italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( { italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT } , { italic_y } ) = ⟨ divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG / divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ⟩ , (2)

where delimited-⟨⟩\langle\dots\rangle⟨ … ⟩ means averaging over the geometry of hard pA𝑝𝐴pAitalic_p italic_A collision. In particular, this averaging includes averaging over the impact parameter for pA𝑝𝐴pAitalic_p italic_A collision. However, it is natural to assume that the medium effects for pA𝑝𝐴pAitalic_p italic_A jet production are sensitive only to the parameters of the QGP fireball, and not to the impact parameter itself111In principle, the impact parameter dependence of YpAsubscript𝑌𝑝𝐴Y_{pA}italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT can come from the nuclear modification of the nuclear PDFs. However, since YpAsubscript𝑌𝑝𝐴Y_{pA}italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (2) is expressed through the ratio of the hard cross sections, the effect of of the nuclear PDFs turns out to be practically negligible. For this reason, for a given UE charged multiplicity Nchuesuperscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒N_{ch}^{ue}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (i.e., for a given parameters of the QGP fireball) in (2) delimited-⟨⟩\langle\dots\rangle⟨ … ⟩ is reduced to averaging over the geometry of the jet production point and of the jet trajectories in the QGP fireball. As in our previous calculations of Rppsubscript𝑅𝑝𝑝R_{pp}italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT Z_hl and Ippsubscript𝐼𝑝𝑝I_{pp}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT Z_Ipp , we calculate IpAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝐴I_{pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in the model of an effective azimuthally symmetric QGP fireball. We evaluate the distribution in the transverse plane of the jet production points in pN𝑝𝑁pNitalic_p italic_N collisions for Gaussian quark density (assuming that gluons have the same transverse distribution as quarks).

We perform calculations of the hard medium modified pN𝑝𝑁pNitalic_p italic_N cross sections in the collinear approximation, neglecting the internal parton transverse momenta in the colliding nucleons. The di-hadron and one-hadron cross sections can be written as

d4σpNdpTadpTtdyadyt=dztztDht/im(zt,pTi)superscript𝑑4subscript𝜎𝑝𝑁𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑇𝑎𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑇𝑡𝑑superscript𝑦𝑎𝑑superscript𝑦𝑡𝑑superscript𝑧𝑡superscript𝑧𝑡superscriptsubscript𝐷superscript𝑡𝑖𝑚superscript𝑧𝑡subscript𝑝𝑇𝑖\displaystyle\frac{d^{4}\sigma_{pN}}{dp_{T}^{a}dp_{T}^{t}dy^{a}dy^{t}}=\int% \frac{dz^{t}}{z^{t}}D_{h^{t}/i}^{m}(z^{t},p_{Ti})divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG = ∫ divide start_ARG italic_d italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT )
×Dha/jm(za,pTj)d3σijpTidpTidyidyj,absentsuperscriptsubscript𝐷superscript𝑎𝑗𝑚superscript𝑧𝑎subscript𝑝𝑇𝑗superscript𝑑3subscript𝜎𝑖𝑗subscript𝑝𝑇𝑖𝑑subscript𝑝𝑇𝑖𝑑subscript𝑦𝑖𝑑subscript𝑦𝑗\displaystyle\times D_{h^{a}/j}^{m}(z^{a},p_{Tj})\frac{d^{3}\sigma_{ij}}{p_{Ti% }dp_{Ti}dy_{i}dy_{j}}\,,× italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG , (3)
d2σpNdpTtdyt=dztztDht/im(zt,pTi)d2σidpTidyi,superscript𝑑2subscript𝜎𝑝𝑁𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑇𝑡𝑑superscript𝑦𝑡𝑑superscript𝑧𝑡superscript𝑧𝑡superscriptsubscript𝐷superscript𝑡𝑖𝑚superscript𝑧𝑡subscript𝑝𝑇𝑖superscript𝑑2subscript𝜎𝑖𝑑subscript𝑝𝑇𝑖𝑑subscript𝑦𝑖\frac{d^{2}\sigma_{pN}}{dp_{T}^{t}dy^{t}}=\int\frac{dz^{t}}{z^{t}}D_{h^{t}/i}^% {m}(z^{t},p_{Ti})\frac{d^{2}\sigma_{i}}{dp_{Ti}dy_{i}}\,,divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_N end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_d italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG = ∫ divide start_ARG italic_d italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT , italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG , (4)

where d3σijdpTidyidyjsuperscript𝑑3subscript𝜎𝑖𝑗𝑑subscript𝑝𝑇𝑖𝑑subscript𝑦𝑖𝑑subscript𝑦𝑗\frac{d^{3}\sigma_{ij}}{dp_{Ti}dy_{i}dy_{j}}divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 3 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG is the two-parton cross section of p+Ni+j+X𝑝𝑁𝑖𝑗𝑋p+N\to i+j+Xitalic_p + italic_N → italic_i + italic_j + italic_X process for yi=ytsubscript𝑦𝑖superscript𝑦𝑡y_{i}=y^{t}italic_y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, yj=yasubscript𝑦𝑗superscript𝑦𝑎y_{j}=y^{a}italic_y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_y start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, pTi=pTj=pTt/ztsubscript𝑝𝑇𝑖subscript𝑝𝑇𝑗superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑇𝑡superscript𝑧𝑡p_{Ti}=p_{Tj}=p_{T}^{t}/z^{t}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and za=ztpTa/pTtsuperscript𝑧𝑎superscript𝑧𝑡superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑇𝑎superscriptsubscript𝑝𝑇𝑡z^{a}=z^{t}p_{T}^{a}/p_{T}^{t}italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = italic_z start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT, d2σidpTidyisuperscript𝑑2subscript𝜎𝑖𝑑subscript𝑝𝑇𝑖𝑑subscript𝑦𝑖\frac{d^{2}\sigma_{i}}{dp_{Ti}dy_{i}}divide start_ARG italic_d start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG is the one-parton cross section for p+Ni+X𝑝𝑁𝑖𝑋p+N\to i+Xitalic_p + italic_N → italic_i + italic_X process, Dht/imsuperscriptsubscript𝐷superscript𝑡𝑖𝑚D_{h^{t}/i}^{m}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and Dha/jmsuperscriptsubscript𝐷superscript𝑎𝑗𝑚D_{h^{a}/j}^{m}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT are the medium-modified FFs for transitions iht𝑖superscript𝑡i\to h^{t}italic_i → italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT and jha𝑗superscript𝑎j\to h^{a}italic_j → italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT.

For calculation of the medium-modified FFs Dh/im(z,Q)superscriptsubscript𝐷𝑖𝑚𝑧𝑄D_{h/i}^{m}(z,Q)italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h / italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_z , italic_Q ) we use the same method as in Z_hl , and we therefore only briefly outline it. We write Dh/imsuperscriptsubscript𝐷𝑖𝑚D_{h/i}^{m}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h / italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT as a z𝑧zitalic_z-convolution

Dh/im(Q)Dh/j(Q0)Dj/kinDk/iDGLAP(Q),superscriptsubscript𝐷𝑖𝑚𝑄tensor-productsubscript𝐷𝑗subscript𝑄0superscriptsubscript𝐷𝑗𝑘𝑖𝑛superscriptsubscript𝐷𝑘𝑖𝐷𝐺𝐿𝐴𝑃𝑄D_{h/i}^{m}(Q)\approx D_{h/j}(Q_{0})\otimes D_{j/k}^{in}\otimes D_{k/i}^{DGLAP% }(Q)\,,italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h / italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_Q ) ≈ italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h / italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) ⊗ italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j / italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⊗ italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k / italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D italic_G italic_L italic_A italic_P end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_Q ) , (5)

where Dk/iDGLAPsuperscriptsubscript𝐷𝑘𝑖𝐷𝐺𝐿𝐴𝑃D_{k/i}^{DGLAP}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k / italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D italic_G italic_L italic_A italic_P end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the DGLAP FF for ik𝑖𝑘i\to kitalic_i → italic_k transition, Dj/kinsuperscriptsubscript𝐷𝑗𝑘𝑖𝑛D_{j/k}^{in}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j / italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the in-medium jk𝑗𝑘j\to kitalic_j → italic_k FF, and Dha,t/jsubscript𝐷superscript𝑎𝑡𝑗D_{h^{a,t}/j}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a , italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are the FFs for hadronization transitions of the parton j𝑗jitalic_j to hadrons ha,tsuperscript𝑎𝑡h^{a,t}italic_h start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_a , italic_t end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT. To compute the DGLAP FFs Dk/iDGLAPsuperscriptsubscript𝐷𝑘𝑖𝐷𝐺𝐿𝐴𝑃D_{k/i}^{DGLAP}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_k / italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_D italic_G italic_L italic_A italic_P end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT we use the PYTHIA event generator PYTHIA . As in Z_hl , we calculate the induced gluon spectrum using the method of RAA04 ; RAA08 , and express the in-medium FFs Dj/kinsuperscriptsubscript𝐷𝑗𝑘𝑖𝑛D_{j/k}^{in}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j / italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT through the induced gluon spectrum in the approximation of the independent gluon emission RAA_BDMS . We treat the collisional energy loss, that is relatively small Z_coll , as a perturbation to the radiative mechanism (see Z_hl for details). For the FFs Dh/jsubscript𝐷𝑗D_{h/j}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_h / italic_j end_POSTSUBSCRIPT we use the KKP KKP parametrization with Q0=2subscript𝑄02Q_{0}=2italic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 2 GeV.

We calculate the gluon induced spectrum (needed for calculation of Dj/kinsuperscriptsubscript𝐷𝑗𝑘𝑖𝑛D_{j/k}^{in}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j / italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT) using the parametrization of running αssubscript𝛼𝑠\alpha_{s}italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in the form RAA20T ; Z_hl (supported by the lattice results for the in-medium αssubscript𝛼𝑠\alpha_{s}italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT Bazavov_al1 )

αs(Q,T)={4π9log(Q2ΛQCD2)if Q>Qfr(T),αsfr(T)if Qfr(T)QcQfr(T),Qαsfr(T)cQfr(T)if Q<cQfr(T),subscript𝛼𝑠𝑄𝑇cases4𝜋9superscript𝑄2superscriptsubscriptΛ𝑄𝐶𝐷2if 𝑄subscript𝑄𝑓𝑟𝑇superscriptsubscript𝛼𝑠𝑓𝑟𝑇if subscript𝑄𝑓𝑟𝑇𝑄𝑐subscript𝑄𝑓𝑟𝑇𝑄superscriptsubscript𝛼𝑠𝑓𝑟𝑇𝑐subscript𝑄𝑓𝑟𝑇if 𝑄𝑐subscript𝑄𝑓𝑟𝑇\alpha_{s}(Q,T)=\begin{cases}\dfrac{4\pi}{9\log(\frac{Q^{2}}{\Lambda_{QCD}^{2}% })}&\mbox{if }Q>Q_{fr}(T)\;,\\ \alpha_{s}^{fr}(T)&\mbox{if }Q_{fr}(T)\geq Q\geq cQ_{fr}(T)\;,\\ \frac{Q\alpha_{s}^{fr}(T)}{cQ_{fr}(T)}&\mbox{if }Q<cQ_{fr}(T)\;,\\ \end{cases}italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_Q , italic_T ) = { start_ROW start_CELL divide start_ARG 4 italic_π end_ARG start_ARG 9 roman_log ( divide start_ARG italic_Q start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG roman_Λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Q italic_C italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ) end_ARG end_CELL start_CELL if italic_Q > italic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_T ) end_CELL start_CELL if italic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) ≥ italic_Q ≥ italic_c italic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) , end_CELL end_ROW start_ROW start_CELL divide start_ARG italic_Q italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_T ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_c italic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) end_ARG end_CELL start_CELL if italic_Q < italic_c italic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) , end_CELL end_ROW (6)

with c=0.8𝑐0.8c=0.8italic_c = 0.8, Qfr(T)=ΛQCDexp{2π/9αsfr(T)}subscript𝑄𝑓𝑟𝑇subscriptΛ𝑄𝐶𝐷2𝜋9superscriptsubscript𝛼𝑠𝑓𝑟𝑇Q_{fr}(T)=\Lambda_{QCD}\exp\left\{{2\pi}/{9\alpha_{s}^{fr}(T)}\right\}italic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_T ) = roman_Λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Q italic_C italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT roman_exp { 2 italic_π / 9 italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f italic_r end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_T ) } (we take ΛQCD=200subscriptΛ𝑄𝐶𝐷200\Lambda_{QCD}=200roman_Λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Q italic_C italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 200 MeV) and Qfr=κTsubscript𝑄𝑓𝑟𝜅𝑇Q_{fr}=\kappa Titalic_Q start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f italic_r end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = italic_κ italic_T, where κ𝜅\kappaitalic_κ is a free parameter. We take κ=2.55𝜅2.55\kappa=2.55italic_κ = 2.55. It has been obtained for scenario with the QGP formation in pp𝑝𝑝ppitalic_p italic_p collisions by χ2superscript𝜒2\chi^{2}italic_χ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT fitting of the LHC data on RAAsubscript𝑅𝐴𝐴R_{AA}italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for 2.76 and 5.02 TeV Pb+Pb, and 5.44 TeV Xe+Xe collisions (see Z_hl for details).

As in Z_hl , we calculate Dj/kinsuperscriptsubscript𝐷𝑗𝑘𝑖𝑛D_{j/k}^{in}italic_D start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_j / italic_k end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i italic_n end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT for a fireball with a uniform entropy/density distribution in the transverse plane. We assume the Bjorken 1+1D longitudinal Bjorken expansion of the QGP fireball at the proper time τ>τ0=0.5𝜏subscript𝜏00.5\tau>\tau_{0}=0.5italic_τ > italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 0.5 fm. It corresponds to the QGP entropy density s=s0(τ0/τ)𝑠subscript𝑠0subscript𝜏0𝜏s=s_{0}(\tau_{0}/\tau)italic_s = italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_τ ). As in Z_hl , for τ<τ0𝜏subscript𝜏0\tau<\tau_{0}italic_τ < italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT we take s=s0(τ/τ0)𝑠subscript𝑠0𝜏subscript𝜏0s=s_{0}(\tau/\tau_{0})italic_s = italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_τ / italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ). We write s0subscript𝑠0s_{0}italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in terms of the charged multiplicity density dNchf/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑓𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{f}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η as

s0=Cτ0πRf2dNchfdη,subscript𝑠0𝐶subscript𝜏0𝜋superscriptsubscript𝑅𝑓2𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑓𝑑𝜂s_{0}=\frac{C}{\tau_{0}\pi R_{f}^{2}}\frac{dN_{ch}^{f}}{d\eta}\,,italic_s start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = divide start_ARG italic_C end_ARG start_ARG italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_π italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG divide start_ARG italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_η end_ARG , (7)

where Rfsubscript𝑅𝑓R_{f}italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the fireball radius, C=dS/dy/dNch/dη7.67𝐶𝑑𝑆𝑑𝑦𝑑subscript𝑁𝑐𝑑𝜂7.67C=dS/dy{\Big{/}}dN_{ch}/d\eta\approx 7.67italic_C = italic_d italic_S / italic_d italic_y / italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η ≈ 7.67 is the entropy/multiplicity ratio BM-entropy , dNchf/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑓𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{f}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η is the part of the observed UE charged multiplicity density related to hadronization of the QGP fireball (dNchf/dη=FqgpdNchue/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑓𝑑𝜂subscript𝐹𝑞𝑔𝑝𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{f}/d\eta=F_{qgp}dN_{ch}^{ue}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η = italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q italic_g italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η).

Calculation of the QGP fireball parameters. We calculate the fireball radius Rfsubscript𝑅𝑓R_{f}italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT and the QGP fraction of the UE multiplicity Fqgpsubscript𝐹𝑞𝑔𝑝F_{qgp}italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q italic_g italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT as functions of the observed UE charged multiplicity density dNchue/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{ue}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η with the help of the MC Glauber wounded nucleon model developed in MCGL1 ; MCGL2 . The MC Glauber model of MCGL1 ; MCGL2 allows to perform calculations accounting for the nucleon meson cloud. In the present analysis we use the version without the meson cloud. The impact parameter profile of the probability of inelastic NN𝑁𝑁NNitalic_N italic_N interactions is taken in a Gaussian form P(ρ)=exp(πρ2/σinpp).𝑃𝜌𝜋superscript𝜌2superscriptsubscript𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑝𝑝P(\rho)=\exp\left(-\pi\rho^{2}/\sigma_{in}^{pp}\right)\,.italic_P ( italic_ρ ) = roman_exp ( - italic_π italic_ρ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ) . As in Z_xe , for σinNNsuperscriptsubscript𝜎𝑖𝑛𝑁𝑁\sigma_{in}^{NN}italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_N italic_N end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT we use the NSD inelastic pp𝑝𝑝ppitalic_p italic_p cross section σNSDpp=55.44superscriptsubscript𝜎𝑁𝑆𝐷𝑝𝑝55.44\sigma_{NSD}^{pp}=55.44italic_σ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_N italic_S italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT = 55.44 mb. For the 208Pb nucleus we use the Woods-Saxon nuclear distribution ρA(r)=ρ0/[1+exp((rRA)/a)]subscript𝜌𝐴𝑟subscript𝜌0delimited-[]1𝑟subscript𝑅𝐴𝑎\rho_{A}(r)=\rho_{0}/[1+\exp((r-R_{A})/a)]italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_r ) = italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / [ 1 + roman_exp ( ( italic_r - italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) / italic_a ) ] with the hard-core NN𝑁𝑁NNitalic_N italic_N repulsion. We take RA=6.407subscript𝑅𝐴6.407R_{A}=6.407italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 6.407 fm, a=0.459𝑎0.459a=0.459italic_a = 0.459 fm, and the hard-core radius d=0.9𝑑0.9d=0.9italic_d = 0.9 fm GLISS3 . In MCGL1 ; MCGL2 ; Z_xe the MC Glauber simulations of nuclear collisions have been performed including the the sources corresponding to the wounded nucleons and to the binary collisions KN . Fitting of the LHC data on the centrality dependence of the midrapidity dNch(AA)/dη𝑑subscript𝑁𝑐𝐴𝐴𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}(AA)/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_A italic_A ) / italic_d italic_η gives the binary collisions fraction parameter α0.13similar-to𝛼0.13\alpha\sim 0.13italic_α ∼ 0.13 MCGL2 ; Z_xe . However, the data on the midrapidity charged multiplicity density in the minimum bias 5.02 TeV p𝑝pitalic_p+Pb collisions ALICE_pPb agree better with α0𝛼0\alpha\approx 0italic_α ≈ 0. In this case, the prediction of the Glauber wounded model for the minimum bias midrapidity charged multiplicity in pA𝑝𝐴pAitalic_p italic_A collisions reads

dNchmb(pA)dη=Nwmb2dNchmb(pp)dη,𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑚𝑏𝑝𝐴𝑑𝜂superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑤𝑚𝑏2𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑚𝑏𝑝𝑝𝑑𝜂\frac{dN_{ch}^{mb}(pA)}{d\eta}=\frac{N_{w}^{mb}}{2}\cdot\frac{dN_{ch}^{mb}(pp)% }{d\eta}\,,divide start_ARG italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m italic_b end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_A ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_η end_ARG = divide start_ARG italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m italic_b end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ⋅ divide start_ARG italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m italic_b end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_p ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_η end_ARG , (8)

where Nwmbsuperscriptsubscript𝑁𝑤𝑚𝑏N_{w}^{mb}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m italic_b end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the minimum bias number of wounded nucleons, and dNchmb(pp)/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑚𝑏𝑝𝑝𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{mb}(pp)/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m italic_b end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_p ) / italic_d italic_η is the minimum bias midrapidity charged multiplicity density in pp𝑝𝑝ppitalic_p italic_p collisions. The MC Glauber simulation of minimum bias 5.02 TeV p𝑝pitalic_p+Pb collisions gives Nwmb6.87superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑤𝑚𝑏6.87N_{w}^{mb}\approx 6.87italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m italic_b end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ≈ 6.87. With this value and dNchmb(pp)/dη5.34𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑚𝑏𝑝𝑝𝑑𝜂5.34dN_{ch}^{mb}(pp)/d\eta\approx 5.34italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m italic_b end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_p ) / italic_d italic_η ≈ 5.34222This value of dNchmb(pp)/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑚𝑏𝑝𝑝𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{mb}(pp)/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m italic_b end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_p ) / italic_d italic_η can be obtained Z_xe with the help of the power law interpolation between the ALICE data ALICE_nch541 at s=2.76𝑠2.76\sqrt{s}=2.76square-root start_ARG italic_s end_ARG = 2.76 TeV (dNchmb(pp)/dη4.63𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑚𝑏𝑝𝑝𝑑𝜂4.63dN_{ch}^{mb}(pp)/d\eta\approx 4.63italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m italic_b end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_p ) / italic_d italic_η ≈ 4.63) and at s=7𝑠7\sqrt{s}=7square-root start_ARG italic_s end_ARG = 7 TeV (dNchmb(pp)/dη=5.74±0.15𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑚𝑏𝑝𝑝𝑑𝜂plus-or-minus5.740.15dN_{ch}^{mb}(pp)/d\eta=5.74\pm 0.15italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m italic_b end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_p ) / italic_d italic_η = 5.74 ± 0.15) for the charged multiplicity in the NSD events., formula (8) gives dNchmb(pPb)/dη18.3𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑚𝑏𝑝Pb𝑑𝜂18.3dN_{ch}^{mb}(p\mbox{Pb})/d\eta\approx 18.3italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m italic_b end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p Pb ) / italic_d italic_η ≈ 18.3 that agrees well with the ALICE measurement dNchmb(pPb)/dη17.8𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑚𝑏𝑝𝑃𝑏𝑑𝜂17.8dN_{ch}^{mb}(pPb)/d\eta\approx 17.8italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m italic_b end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_P italic_b ) / italic_d italic_η ≈ 17.8 ALICE_pPb . To generalize (8) to jet events one should account for the fact that one of the wounded nucleons in the nucleus and the projectile proton participate in jet production. It is reasonable to expect that the contribution of this pair pN𝑝𝑁pNitalic_p italic_N to the multiplicity density should be equal to the average UE multiplicity density dNchue(pp)/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑝𝑝𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{ue}(pp)/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_p ) / italic_d italic_η in pp𝑝𝑝ppitalic_p italic_p jet events. Then, the generalization of (8) to the case of the minimum bias UE multiplicity density in jet events can be written as

dNchue(pA)dη=dNchue(pp)dη+Nwue22dNchmb(pp)dη,𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑝𝐴𝑑𝜂𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑝𝑝𝑑𝜂superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑤𝑢𝑒22𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑚𝑏𝑝𝑝𝑑𝜂\frac{dN_{ch}^{ue}(pA)}{d\eta}=\frac{dN_{ch}^{ue}(pp)}{d\eta}+\frac{N_{w}^{ue}% -2}{2}\cdot\frac{dN_{ch}^{mb}(pp)}{d\eta}\,,divide start_ARG italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_A ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_η end_ARG = divide start_ARG italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_p ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_η end_ARG + divide start_ARG italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT - 2 end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG ⋅ divide start_ARG italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m italic_b end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_p ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_η end_ARG , (9)

where Nwuesuperscriptsubscript𝑁𝑤𝑢𝑒N_{w}^{ue}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT is the average number of the wounded nucleons in jet events. Our MC Glauber simulation gives Nwue9.9superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑤𝑢𝑒9.9N_{w}^{ue}\approx 9.9italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ≈ 9.9 for 5.02 TeV p𝑝pitalic_p+Pb collisions. Then, using dNchue(pp)/dη12.5𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑝𝑝𝑑𝜂12.5dN_{ch}^{ue}(pp)/d\eta\approx 12.5italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_p ) / italic_d italic_η ≈ 12.5 for 5.025.025.025.02 TeV pp𝑝𝑝ppitalic_p italic_p jet events (obtained by interpolating the ATLAS data ATLAS_UE_Nch at s=0.9𝑠0.9\sqrt{s}=0.9square-root start_ARG italic_s end_ARG = 0.9 and 7777 TeV, assuming that dNchue(pp)/dηsδproportional-to𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑝𝑝𝑑𝜂superscript𝑠𝛿dN_{ch}^{ue}(pp)/d\eta\propto s^{\delta}italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_p ) / italic_d italic_η ∝ italic_s start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_δ end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT), from the formula (9) we obtain dNchue(pPb)/dη33.5𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑝Pb𝑑𝜂33.5dN_{ch}^{ue}(p\mbox{Pb})/d\eta\approx 33.5italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p Pb ) / italic_d italic_η ≈ 33.5, which agrees well with that obtained in the ALICE experiment ALICE_Ipp (NchT=7.77±0.31delimited-⟨⟩superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑇plus-or-minus7.770.31\langle N_{ch}^{T}\rangle=7.77\pm 0.31⟨ italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ⟩ = 7.77 ± 0.31 that corresponds to dNchue(pPb)/dη=34.19±1.36𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑝Pb𝑑𝜂plus-or-minus34.191.36dN_{ch}^{ue}(p\mbox{Pb})/d\eta=34.19\pm 1.36italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p Pb ) / italic_d italic_η = 34.19 ± 1.36). Thus, one sees that the predictions of the MC Glauber model for the minimum bias and the UE midrapidity charged multiplicities in p𝑝pitalic_p+Pb collisions are in good agreement with the experimental data.

To perform the MC Glauber simulation of the geometry of the entropy production in pA𝑝𝐴pAitalic_p italic_A jet events, for each wounded nucleon we use the Gaussian distribution of the entropy density in the transverse coordinates

dSwi(𝝆𝝆i)dyd𝝆=Cexp[(𝝆𝝆i)2/σ2]πσ2dNchi/dη2,𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑆𝑤𝑖𝝆subscript𝝆𝑖𝑑𝑦𝑑𝝆𝐶superscript𝝆subscript𝝆𝑖2superscript𝜎2𝜋superscript𝜎2𝑑subscriptsuperscript𝑁𝑖𝑐𝑑𝜂2\frac{dS_{w}^{i}(\mbox{{\boldmath$\rho$}}-\mbox{{\boldmath$\rho$}}_{i})}{dyd% \mbox{{\boldmath$\rho$}}}=\frac{C\exp[-(\mbox{{\boldmath$\rho$}}-\mbox{{% \boldmath$\rho$}}_{i})^{2}/\sigma^{2}]}{\pi\sigma^{2}}\cdot\frac{dN^{i}_{ch}/d% \eta}{2}\,,divide start_ARG italic_d italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_w end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( bold_italic_ρ - bold_italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG start_ARG italic_d italic_y italic_d bold_italic_ρ end_ARG = divide start_ARG italic_C roman_exp [ - ( bold_italic_ρ - bold_italic_ρ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_σ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ] end_ARG start_ARG italic_π italic_σ start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 2 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT end_ARG ⋅ divide start_ARG italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η end_ARG start_ARG 2 end_ARG , (10)

where i=1,2𝑖12i=1,2italic_i = 1 , 2 correspond to the nucleons participating in jet production, and i>2𝑖2i>2italic_i > 2 to the ordinary wounded nucleons. We treat dNchi/dη𝑑subscriptsuperscript𝑁𝑖𝑐𝑑𝜂dN^{i}_{ch}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η as random variables. Below we use the short-hand notations nisubscript𝑛𝑖n_{i}italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for dNchi/dη𝑑subscriptsuperscript𝑁𝑖𝑐𝑑𝜂dN^{i}_{ch}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η. As in MCGL2 ; Z_xe , we describe fluctuations of nisubscript𝑛𝑖n_{i}italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT by the widely used in the MC Glauber simulations Gamma distribution

G(ni)=(nini)κi1κiκiexp[niκi/ni]niΓ(κi).𝐺subscript𝑛𝑖superscriptsubscript𝑛𝑖delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝑛𝑖subscript𝜅𝑖1superscriptsubscript𝜅𝑖subscript𝜅𝑖subscript𝑛𝑖subscript𝜅𝑖delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝑛𝑖delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝑛𝑖Γsubscript𝜅𝑖G(n_{i})=\left(\frac{n_{i}}{\langle n_{i}\rangle}\right)^{\kappa_{i}-1}\frac{% \kappa_{i}^{\kappa_{i}}\exp\left[-n_{i}\kappa_{i}/\langle n_{i}\rangle\right]}% {\langle n_{i}\rangle\Gamma(\kappa_{i})}\,.italic_G ( italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) = ( divide start_ARG italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_ARG start_ARG ⟨ italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ end_ARG ) start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT - 1 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT divide start_ARG italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT roman_exp [ - italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ⟨ italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ] end_ARG start_ARG ⟨ italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ roman_Γ ( italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ) end_ARG . (11)

The ni>2delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝑛𝑖2\langle n_{i>2}\rangle⟨ italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i > 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ should be equal to the minimum bias pp𝑝𝑝ppitalic_p italic_p charged multiplicity pseudorapidity density dNchmb(pp)/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑚𝑏𝑝𝑝𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{mb}(pp)/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_m italic_b end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_p ) / italic_d italic_η, i.e., for 5.025.025.025.02 TeV pp𝑝𝑝ppitalic_p italic_p collisions we have ni>25.34delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝑛𝑖25.34\langle n_{i>2}\rangle\approx 5.34⟨ italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i > 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ≈ 5.34. The value of the parameter κi>2subscript𝜅𝑖2\kappa_{i>2}italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i > 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT has been adjusted to reproduce the experimental variance of the charged pp𝑝𝑝ppitalic_p italic_p multiplicity in the unit pseudorapidity window |η|<0.5𝜂0.5|\eta|<0.5| italic_η | < 0.5. This gives κi>20.56subscript𝜅𝑖20.56\kappa_{i>2}\approx 0.56italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i > 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ 0.56 Z_xe . The value of ni=1,2delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝑛𝑖12\langle n_{i=1,2}\rangle⟨ italic_n start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 , 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ should be equal to dNchue(pp)/dη12.5𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑝𝑝𝑑𝜂12.5dN_{ch}^{ue}(pp)/d\eta\approx 12.5italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_p ) / italic_d italic_η ≈ 12.5. We adjusted the parameter κi=1,2subscript𝜅𝑖12\kappa_{i=1,2}italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 , 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT to reproduce the variance of the midrapidity pp𝑝𝑝ppitalic_p italic_p UE charged multiplicity density, that has been evaluated using the CMS data CMS_UE7 on the UE multiplicity distribution for 7777 TeV pp𝑝𝑝ppitalic_p italic_p collisions (rescaled to s=5.02𝑠5.02\sqrt{s}=5.02square-root start_ARG italic_s end_ARG = 5.02 TeV assuming the KNO scaling). This procedure gives κi=1,21.1subscript𝜅𝑖121.1\kappa_{i=1,2}\approx 1.1italic_κ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_i = 1 , 2 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ 1.1

We used the following procedure to differentiate the QGP fireball and corona transverse regions in our MC Glauber simulation of the UE for jet production in p𝑝pitalic_p+Pb collisions. We attribute to the QGP fireball the regions with the local ideal gas temperature (defined via the entropy density at τ=τ0𝜏subscript𝜏0\tau=\tau_{0}italic_τ = italic_τ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT) larger than TminTcsimilar-tosubscript𝑇𝑚𝑖𝑛subscript𝑇𝑐T_{min}\sim T_{c}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m italic_i italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∼ italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT (where Tc160subscript𝑇𝑐160T_{c}\approx 160italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ 160 MeV is the deconfinement temperature)333This criterion is similar to that used in glasma_pp within the IP-Glasma model (there the authors attributed to the QGP regions with the energy density ϵ>aΛQCD4italic-ϵ𝑎superscriptsubscriptΛ𝑄𝐶𝐷4\epsilon>a\Lambda_{QCD}^{4}italic_ϵ > italic_a roman_Λ start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_Q italic_C italic_D end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT 4 end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT with a110similar-to𝑎110a\sim 1-10italic_a ∼ 1 - 10).. We performed calculations for two versions with Tmin=160subscript𝑇𝑚𝑖𝑛160T_{min}=160italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m italic_i italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 160 and 200200200200 MeV. Using this procedure we obtained the relative QGP contribution to the UE charged multiplicity dNchue/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{ue}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η as functions of the observed UE charged multiplicity density dNchue/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{ue}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η. We define the radius of the effective fireball (with the flat entropy density), from the condition that the mean squared radius of the QGP fireball coincides with that for the MC Glauber entropy distribution in the region T>Tmin𝑇subscript𝑇𝑚𝑖𝑛T>T_{min}italic_T > italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m italic_i italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. We also performed the calculations for the radius of the effective fireball defined as Rf=Sf/πsubscript𝑅𝑓subscript𝑆𝑓𝜋R_{f}=\sqrt{S_{f}/\pi}italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = square-root start_ARG italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_π end_ARG, where Sfsubscript𝑆𝑓S_{f}italic_S start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is the area of the region with T>Tmin𝑇subscript𝑇𝑚𝑖𝑛T>T_{min}italic_T > italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m italic_i italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT. It was found that the results for these two methods are very close to each other.

Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 1: The parameters of the QGP fireball obtained in the MC Glauber model simulations for σ=0.7𝜎0.7\sigma=0.7italic_σ = 0.7 (thick lines) and 0.40.40.40.4 fm (thin lines) for Tmin=160subscript𝑇𝑚𝑖𝑛160T_{min}=160italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m italic_i italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 160 (solid) and 200200200200 (dashed) MeV. (a) The relative contribution of the QGP fireball to the midrapidity UE charged multiplicity density dNchue/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{ue}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η vs dNchue/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{ue}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η. (b) The QGP fireball radius vs dNchf/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑓𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{f}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η.
Refer to caption
Refer to caption
Figure 2: The ratio IpA/Ippsubscript𝐼𝑝𝐴delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝐼𝑝𝑝I_{pA}/\langle I_{pp}\rangleitalic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ⟨ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ vs the midrapidity UE charged multiplicity density dNchue/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{ue}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η in 5.025.025.025.02 p𝑝pitalic_p+Pb collisions obtained for σ=0.7𝜎0.7\sigma=0.7italic_σ = 0.7 (a) and 0.40.40.40.4 (b) fm for Tmin=160subscript𝑇𝑚𝑖𝑛160T_{min}=160italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m italic_i italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 160 (solid) and 200200200200 (dashed) MeV. Data points are from ALICE_Ipp_PLB (with the rescaled NchTsuperscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑇N_{ch}^{T}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT variable used in ALICE_Ipp_PLB by the factor 4.4 (see text for explanation).

Numerical results. To illustrate the sensitivity of our results to the choice of the Gaussian width parameter σ𝜎\sigmaitalic_σ (entering Eq. (10)) in the MC Glauber simulations of the UE for jet production in pA𝑝𝐴pAitalic_p italic_A collisions, we present the results for σ=0.7𝜎0.7\sigma=0.7italic_σ = 0.7 and 0.40.40.40.4 fm (the latter value is often used in the MC Glauber model GLISSANDO GLISS3 ). In Fig. 1a we plot the average relative QGP contribution to the UE charged multiplicity density Fqgpsubscript𝐹𝑞𝑔𝑝F_{qgp}italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q italic_g italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT as a function of the UE charged midrapidity multiplicity density dNchue(pA)/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑝𝐴𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{ue}(pA)/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_A ) / italic_d italic_η obtained in the MC Glauber simulations for Tmin=160subscript𝑇𝑚𝑖𝑛160T_{min}=160italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m italic_i italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 160 and 200200200200 MeV. As seen in Fig. 1a, Fqgpsubscript𝐹𝑞𝑔𝑝F_{qgp}italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q italic_g italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT becomes smaller at lower total UE charged multiplicity, i.e., the corona effect is more important in the low multiplicity jet events. In Fig. 1b we present the results for the effective fireball radius as a function of dNchf/dη=FqgpdNchue/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑓𝑑𝜂subscript𝐹𝑞𝑔𝑝𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{f}/d\eta=F_{qgp}dN_{ch}^{ue}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η = italic_F start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_q italic_g italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η for the same parameters as in Fig. 1a. For the initial QGP temperature (for the ideal gas model) we obtained T0210220(330350)similar-tosubscript𝑇0210220330350T_{0}\sim 210-220(330-350)italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT 0 end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ∼ 210 - 220 ( 330 - 350 ) MeV at dNchf/dη10(60)similar-to𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑓𝑑𝜂1060dN_{ch}^{f}/d\eta\sim 10(60)italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η ∼ 10 ( 60 ).

The results for IpA/Ippsubscript𝐼𝑝𝐴delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝐼𝑝𝑝I_{pA}/\langle I_{pp}\rangleitalic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ⟨ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ as a function of the UE charged multiplicity density are shown in Fig. 2 (we use Ipp0.94delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝐼𝑝𝑝0.94\langle I_{pp}\rangle\approx 0.94⟨ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ≈ 0.94 obtained in Z_Ipp ). The coordinates for the data points from ALICE_Ipp_PLB , shown in Fig. 2, have been rescaled by the factor r4.4𝑟4.4r\approx 4.4italic_r ≈ 4.4 from the variable NchTsuperscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑇N_{ch}^{T}italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT (corresponding to the UE charged multiplicity in the transverse kinematical region π/3|ϕ|2π/3𝜋3italic-ϕ2𝜋3\pi/3\leq|\phi|\leq 2\pi/3italic_π / 3 ≤ | italic_ϕ | ≤ 2 italic_π / 3, |η|<0.8𝜂0.8|\eta|<0.8| italic_η | < 0.8, and pT>0.5subscript𝑝𝑇0.5p_{T}>0.5italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT > 0.5 GeV) to the UE charged multiplicity dNchue/dη𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{ue}/d\etaitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η defined in the whole ϕitalic-ϕ\phiitalic_ϕ and pTsubscript𝑝𝑇p_{T}italic_p start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUBSCRIPT regions for the pseudorapidity window |η|<0.5𝜂0.5|\eta|<0.5| italic_η | < 0.5. The theoretical curves were obtained for σ=0.7𝜎0.7\sigma=0.7italic_σ = 0.7 (a) and 0.40.40.40.4 (b) fm and Tf=160subscript𝑇𝑓160T_{f}=160italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_f end_POSTSUBSCRIPT = 160 (solid) and 200200200200 (dashed) MeV. Fig. 2 clearly shows that predictions for IpAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝐴I_{pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT turn out to be rather insensitive to the parameter σ𝜎\sigmaitalic_σ in (10) used in the MC Glauber model and to the value of Tminsubscript𝑇𝑚𝑖𝑛T_{min}italic_T start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_m italic_i italic_n end_POSTSUBSCRIPT used for evaluation of the size and the entropy of the QGP fireball. We also performed calculations for the MC Glauber scheme without the short range NN𝑁𝑁NNitalic_N italic_N correlations. We have found that in this case the results are practically the same as that shown in Figs. 1, 2. It is not surprising, since for p𝑝pitalic_p+Pb collisions the typical 3D separation between the wounded nucleons is larger than the NN𝑁𝑁NNitalic_N italic_N hard core radius by a factor of 23232-32 - 3.

As one can see from Fig. 2, the theoretical IpAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝐴I_{pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT decreases by 8similar-toabsent8\sim 8∼ 8% from dNchue/dη10similar-to𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑑𝜂10dN_{ch}^{ue}/d\eta\sim 10italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η ∼ 10 to dNchue/dη60similar-to𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑑𝜂60dN_{ch}^{ue}/d\eta\sim 60italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT / italic_d italic_η ∼ 60. The experimental data show approximately similar tendency. The theoretical predictions are in reasonable agreement with the data within the measured uncertainties. However, from Fig. 2 one sees that the normalization of the theoretical curves is smaller by 34similar-toabsent34\sim 3-4∼ 3 - 4% than that for the ALICE data ALICE_Ipp_PLB . This may be due to the systematic errors of the experimental yield YpAsubscript𝑌𝑝𝐴Y_{pA}italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT, that are rather large (7similar-toabsent7\sim 7∼ 7%). Physically, in the picture with jet modification due to the final state interaction effects in the QGP fireball, one can expect that in the region with dNchue(pA)/dηdNchue(pp)/dη <1213similar-to𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑝𝐴𝑑𝜂delimited-⟨⟩𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑝𝑝𝑑𝜂 <1213dN_{ch}^{ue}(pA)/d\eta\sim\langle dN_{ch}^{ue}(pp)/d\eta\rangle\mathrel{\hbox to% 0.0pt{\lower 4.0pt\hbox{\hskip 1.0pt$\sim$}\hss}\raise 1.0pt\hbox{$<$}}12-13italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_A ) / italic_d italic_η ∼ ⟨ italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_p ) / italic_d italic_η ⟩ ∼< 12 - 13 (i.e., in the regime where the single pN𝑝𝑁pNitalic_p italic_N interaction should dominate) there must be YpA/Ypp1subscript𝑌𝑝𝐴delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝑌𝑝𝑝1Y_{pA}/\langle Y_{pp}\rangle\approx 1italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ⟨ italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ≈ 1, i.e., IpA/Ipp1subscript𝐼𝑝𝐴delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝐼𝑝𝑝1I_{pA}/\langle I_{pp}\rangle\approx 1italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ⟨ italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ≈ 1. But for the ALICE data ALICE_Ipp_PLB we have YpA/Ypp1.05±0.07similar-tosubscript𝑌𝑝𝐴delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝑌𝑝𝑝plus-or-minus1.050.07Y_{pA}/\langle Y_{pp}\rangle\sim 1.05\pm 0.07italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ⟨ italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ ∼ 1.05 ± 0.07 at dNchue(pA)/dηdNchue(pp)/dηsimilar-to𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑝𝐴𝑑𝜂delimited-⟨⟩𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑝𝑝𝑑𝜂dN_{ch}^{ue}(pA)/d\eta\sim\langle dN_{ch}^{ue}(pp)/d\eta\rangleitalic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_A ) / italic_d italic_η ∼ ⟨ italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_p ) / italic_d italic_η ⟩. In principle, the double-parton scattering can lead to YpA/Ypp>1subscript𝑌𝑝𝐴delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝑌𝑝𝑝1Y_{pA}/\langle Y_{pp}\rangle>1italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ⟨ italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ > 1. However, the procedure of ALICE_Ipp_PLB with calculating the ratio YpA/Yppsubscript𝑌𝑝𝐴delimited-⟨⟩subscript𝑌𝑝𝑝Y_{pA}/\langle Y_{pp}\rangleitalic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / ⟨ italic_Y start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ⟩ using for the effective away side pA𝑝𝐴pAitalic_p italic_A and pp𝑝𝑝ppitalic_p italic_p yields the difference between the real measured away side yields and the measured yields in the transverse region, should automatically eliminate the possible background contribution from the double-parton scattering. It is worth noting that for the data of ALICE_Ipp_PLB the factor IpPbsubscript𝐼𝑝𝑃𝑏I_{pPb}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_P italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT at the maximal value of the p𝑝pitalic_p+Pb UE multiplicity (NchmaxT(pPb)13.4superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐max𝑇𝑝𝑃𝑏13.4N_{ch\text{max}}^{T}(pPb)\approx 13.4italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h max end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_P italic_b ) ≈ 13.4) is larger than the factor IPbPbsubscript𝐼𝑃𝑏𝑃𝑏I_{PbPb}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P italic_b italic_P italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT at the minimal Pb+Pb UE multiplicity (NchminT(PbPb)19.2superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐min𝑇𝑃𝑏𝑃𝑏19.2N_{ch\text{min}}^{T}(PbPb)\approx 19.2italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h min end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_P italic_b italic_P italic_b ) ≈ 19.2) by 10similar-toabsent10\sim 10∼ 10%, while, physically, one could expect IpPb/IPbPb1subscript𝐼𝑝𝑃𝑏subscript𝐼𝑃𝑏𝑃𝑏1I_{pPb}/I_{PbPb}\approx 1italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_P italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P italic_b italic_P italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ≈ 1 for NchT(pPb)NchT(PbPb)similar-tosuperscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑇𝑝𝑃𝑏superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑇𝑃𝑏𝑃𝑏N_{ch}^{T}(pPb)\sim N_{ch}^{T}(PbPb)italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_P italic_b ) ∼ italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_P italic_b italic_P italic_b ) (since the UE multiplicity dependence of IpPbsubscript𝐼𝑝𝑃𝑏I_{pPb}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_P italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT is weak, it is clear that the difference between NchmaxT(pPb)superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐max𝑇𝑝𝑃𝑏N_{ch\text{max}}^{T}(pPb)italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h max end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_P italic_b ) and NchminT(PbPb))N_{ch\text{min}}^{T}(PbPb))italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h min end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_P italic_b italic_P italic_b ) ) cannot lead to a considerable variation of IpPb/IPbPbsubscript𝐼𝑝𝑃𝑏subscript𝐼𝑃𝑏𝑃𝑏I_{pPb}/I_{PbPb}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_P italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT / italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P italic_b italic_P italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT). Note that in our model the factor IpPbsubscript𝐼𝑝𝑃𝑏I_{pPb}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_P italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT at dNchue(pPb)/dη85similar-to𝑑superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑢𝑒𝑝𝑃𝑏𝑑𝜂85dN_{ch}^{ue}(pPb)/d\eta\sim 85italic_d italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_u italic_e end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_p italic_P italic_b ) / italic_d italic_η ∼ 85 (that corresponds to NchminT(PbPb)19.2superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐min𝑇𝑃𝑏𝑃𝑏19.2N_{ch\text{min}}^{T}(PbPb)\approx 19.2italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h min end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_P italic_b italic_P italic_b ) ≈ 19.2) agrees reasonably with the factor IPbPbsubscript𝐼𝑃𝑏𝑃𝑏I_{PbPb}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_P italic_b italic_P italic_b end_POSTSUBSCRIPT of ALICE_Ipp_PLB at the minimal NchT(PbPb)superscriptsubscript𝑁𝑐𝑇𝑃𝑏𝑃𝑏N_{ch}^{T}(PbPb)italic_N start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_c italic_h end_POSTSUBSCRIPT start_POSTSUPERSCRIPT italic_T end_POSTSUPERSCRIPT ( italic_P italic_b italic_P italic_b ).

Summary. We have calculated the medium modification factor IpAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝐴I_{pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT for hadron-tagged jets in 5.02 TeV p𝑝pitalic_p+Pb collisions. The medium-modified FFs have been evaluated within the light-cone path integral approach to induced gluon emission. We used parametrization of the running QCD coupling αs(Q,T)subscript𝛼𝑠𝑄𝑇\alpha_{s}(Q,T)italic_α start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_s end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ( italic_Q , italic_T ) which has a plateau around QκTsimilar-to𝑄𝜅𝑇Q\sim\kappa Titalic_Q ∼ italic_κ italic_T (motivated by the lattice simulations Bazavov_al1 ). The value of κ𝜅\kappaitalic_κ is fitted to the LHC data on the nuclear modification factor RAAsubscript𝑅𝐴𝐴R_{AA}italic_R start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_A italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT in 2.762.762.762.76 and 5.025.025.025.02 TeV Pb+Pb, and 5.445.445.445.44 TeV Xe+Xe collisions. To determine the size of the QGP fireball and the fraction of the UE charged multiplicity density related to the formation of the QGP fireball in pA𝑝𝐴pAitalic_p italic_A collisions we used the MC Glauber model. We have found that the theoretical predictions for IpAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝐴I_{pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT are rather insensitivity to the theoretical uncertainties in the MC Glauber modeling of the QGP formation. Our calculations show that the jet quenching effect for IpAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝐴I_{pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT turns out to be rather small. We have found that the theoretical IpAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝐴I_{pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT as a function of the UE charged multiplicity density, within errors, agrees with data from ALICE ALICE_Ipp_PLB for 5.02 TeV p𝑝pitalic_p+Pb collisions. However, the experimental errors are too large to draw a firm conclusion on the possible presence of jet quenching.

Acknowledgements.
I am grateful to S. Tripathy for useful communication on some aspects of the ALICE measurement of Ipp,pAsubscript𝐼𝑝𝑝𝑝𝐴I_{pp,pA}italic_I start_POSTSUBSCRIPT italic_p italic_p , italic_p italic_A end_POSTSUBSCRIPT ALICE_Ipp . This work is supported by Russian Science Foundation grant No. 20-12-00200 in association with Steklov Mathematical Institute.

References

  • (1) S. Acharya et al. [ALICE Collaboration], Phys. Lett. B843, 137649 (2023) [arXiv:2204.10157].
  • (2) R. Derradi de Souza, T. Koide, and T. Kodama, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 86, 35 (2016) [arXiv:1506.03863].
  • (3) P. Romatschke and U. Romatschke, arXiv:1712.05815.
  • (4) M. Connors, C. Nattrass, R. Reed, and S. Salur, Rev. Mod. Phys. 90, 025005 (2018) [arXiv:1705.01974].
  • (5) S. Shi, J. Liao, and M. Gyulassy, Chin. Phys. C43, 044101 (2019) [arXiv:1808.05461].
  • (6) C. Andres, N. Armesto, H. Niemi, R. Paatelainen, and C.A. Salgado, Phys. Lett. B803, 135318 (2020) [arXiv:1902.03231].
  • (7) B.G. Zakharov, JHEP 09, 087 (2021) [arXiv:2105.09350].
  • (8) M. Strickland, arXiv:2402.09571.
  • (9) S. Schlichting and D. Teaney, Ann. Rev. Nucl. Part. Sci. 69, 447 (2019) [arXiv:1908.02113].
  • (10) P.M. Chesler and W. van der Schee, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E24, 1530011 (2015) [arXiv:1501.04952].
  • (11) E.V. Shuryak, Phys. Lett. B78, 150 (1978).
  • (12) P. M. Chesler, JHEP 03, 146 (2016) [arXiv:1601.01583].
  • (13) M. Spalinski, Phys. Rev. D94, 085002 (2016) [arXiv:1607.06381].
  • (14) P. Romatschke, Eur.  Phys. J. C77, 21 (2017) [arXiv:1609.02820].
  • (15) G. Aad et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 110, 182302 (2013) [arXiv:1212.5198].
  • (16) B. Abelev et al. [ALICE Collaboration] Phys. Lett. B719, 29 (2013) [arXiv:1212.2001].
  • (17) V. Khachatryan et al. [CMS Collaboration], JHEP 1009, 091 (2010) [arXiv:1009.4122].
  • (18) G. Aad et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], Phys. Rev. Lett. 116, 172301 (2016) [arXiv:1509.04776].
  • (19) J. Adam et al. [ALICE Collaboration], Nature Phys. 13, 535 (2017) [arXiv:1606.07424].
  • (20) R. Campanini, G. Ferri, and G. Ferri, Phys. Lett. B703, 237 (2011) [arXiv:1106.2008].
  • (21) L. van Hove, Phys. Lett. B118, 138 (1982).
  • (22) A. Kovner and M. Lublinsky, Int. J. Mod. Phys. E22, 1330001 (2013) [arXiv:1211.1928].
  • (23) A. Dumitru, L. McLerran, and V. Skokov, Phys. Lett. B743, 134 (2015) [arXiv:1410.4844].
  • (24) K. Dusling and R. Venugopalan, Phys. Rev. D87, 094034 (2013) [arXiv:1302.7018].
  • (25) R. Field, Acta Phys. Polon. B42, 2631 (2011) [arXiv:1110.5530].
  • (26) B.G. Zakharov, Phys. Rev. Lett. 112, 032301 (2014) [arXiv:1307.3674].
  • (27) S.  Tripathy [for ALICE Collaboration], in 24th DAE-BRNS High Energy Physics Symposium, 14-18 December 2020, Jatni, India, [arXiv:2103.07218].
  • (28) B.G. Zakharov, JETP Lett. 116, 347 (2022) [arXiv:2208.10339].
  • (29) B.G. Zakharov, JETP Lett. 63, 952 (1996) [hep-ph/9607440].
  • (30) B.G. Zakharov, Nucl. Phys. B Proc. Suppl. 146, 151 (2005) [hep-ph/0412117].
  • (31) B.G. Zakharov, JETP Lett. 80, 617 (2004) [hep-ph/0410321].
  • (32) B.G. Zakharov, JETP Lett. 88, 781 (2008) [arXiv:0811.0445].
  • (33) K. Werner, Phys. Rev. Lett. 98, 152301 (2007) [arXiv:0704.1270].
  • (34) A. Adare et al. [PHENIX Collaboration], Phys. Rev. C78, 014901 (2008) [arXiv:0801.4545].
  • (35) X.-N. Wang, Phys. Lett. B595, 165 (2004) [nucl-th/0305010].
  • (36) T. Sjostrand, L. Lonnblad, S. Mrenna, and P. Skands, hep-ph/0308153.
  • (37) R. Baier, Y.L. Dokshitzer, A.H. Mueller, and D. Schiff, JHEP 0109, 033 (2001) [hep-ph/0106347].
  • (38) B.G. Zakharov, JETP Lett. 86, 444 (2007) [arXiv:0708.0816].
  • (39) B.A. Kniehl, G. Kramer, and B. Potter, Nucl. Phys. B582, 514 (2000) [hep-ph/0010289].
  • (40) B.G. Zakharov, JETP Lett. 112, 681 (2020) [arXiv:2011.01526].
  • (41) A.  Bazavov et al., Phys. Rev. D98, 054511 (2018) [arXiv:1804.10600].
  • (42) J.D. Bjorken, Phys. Rev. D27, 140 (1983).
  • (43) B. Müller and K. Rajagopal, Eur. Phys. J. C43, 15 (2005) [hep-ph/0502174].
  • (44) B.G. Zakharov, JETP Lett. 104, 6 (2016) [arXiv:1605.06012].
  • (45) B.G. Zakharov, J.Exp.Theor.Phys. 124, 860 (2017) [arXiv:1611.05825].
  • (46) B.G. Zakharov, Eur. Phys. J. C78, 427 (2018) [arXiv:1804.05405].
  • (47) P. Bozek, W. Broniowski, M. Rybczynski, J. Kochanowski, and G. Stefanek, Comput. Phys. Commun. 245, 106850 (2019) [arXiv:1901.04484].
  • (48) D. Kharzeev and M. Nardi, Phys. Lett. B507, 121 (2001) [nucl-th/0012025].
  • (49) J. Adam et al. [ALICE Collaboration], Phys. Rev. C91, 064905 (2015) [arXiv:1412.6828]
  • (50) G. Aad et al. [ATLAS Collaboration], Phys. Rev. D83, 112001 (2011) [arXiv:1012.0791].
  • (51) J. Adam et al. [ALICE Collaboration], Eur. Phys. J. C77, 33 (2017) [arXiv:1509.07541].
  • (52) S. Chatrchyan et al. [CMS Collaboration], JHEP 09, 109 (2011) [arXiv:1107.0330].
  • (53) A. Bzdak, B. Schenke, P. Tribedy, and R. Venugopalan, Phys. Rev. C87, 064906 (2013) [arXiv:1304.3403].