Hyperon production in Ar + KCl collisions at 1.76A GeV

Abstract

We present transverse momentum spectra, rapidity distribution and multiplicity of L \Lambda -hyperons measured with the HADES spectrometer in the reaction Ar(1.76AGeV) + KCl . The yield of X- \Xi^{{-}}_{} is calculated from our previously reported X- \Xi^{{-}}_{}/(L \Lambda + S0 \Sigma^{{0}}_{}) ratio and compared to other strange particle multiplicities. Employing a strangeness balance equation the multiplicities
of the yet unmeasured S± \Sigma^{{\pm}}_{} -hyperons can be estimated. Finally a statistical hadronization model is used to fit the yields of p- \pi^{-}_{} , K+, K
0
s , K-, f \phi , L \Lambda and X- \Xi^{-}_{} . The resulting chemical freeze-out temperature of T = (76±2) MeV is compared to the measured slope parameters obtained from fits to the transverse mass distributions of the
different particles.

Full text

Page 1

arXiv:1010.1675v3 [nucl-ex] 10 Feb 2011
EPJ manuscript No.
(will be inserted by the editor)
Hyperon production in Ar+KCl collisions at 1.76A GeV
G. Agakishiev6, A. Balanda3,†, B. Bannier5, R. Bassini9, D. Belver16, A. Belyaev6, A. Blanco2, M. B¨ ohmer12,
J. L. Boyard14, P. Cabanelas16, E. Castro16, S. Chernenko6, T. Christ12, M. Destefanis8, J. D´ ıaz17, F. Dohrmann5,
A. Dybczak3, T. Eberl12, E. Epple11, L. Fabbietti11, O. Fateev6, P. Finocchiaro1, P. Fonte2,A, J. Friese12, I. Fr¨ ohlich7,
T. Galatyuk7, J. A. Garz´ on16, R. Gernh¨ auser12, A. Gil17, C. Gilardi8, M. Golubeva10, D. Gonz´ alez-D´ ıaz4, F. Guber10,
M. Gumberidze14, M. Heilmann7, T. Heinz4, T. Hennino14, R. Holzmann4, P. Huck12, I. Iori9,C,†, A. Ivashkin10,
M. Jurkovic12, B. K¨ ampfer5,B, K. Kanaki5, T. Karavicheva10, D. Kirschner8, I. Koenig4, W. Koenig4, B. W. Kolb4,
R. Kotte5, F. Krizek15, R. Kr¨ ucken12, W. K¨ uhn8, A. Kugler15, A. Kurepin10, S. Lang4, J. S. Lange8, K. Lapidus11,E,
T. Liu14, L. Lopes2, M. Lorenz7,∗, L. Maier12, A. Mangiarotti2, J. Markert7, V. Metag8, B. Michalska3, J. Michel7,
D. Mishra8, E. Morini` ere14, J. Mousa13, C. M¨ untz7, L. Naumann5, J. Otwinowski3, Y. C. Pachmayer7, M. Palka7,
Y. Parpottas13, V. Pechenov4, O. Pechenova7, T. P´ erez Cavalcanti8, J. Pietraszko7, W. Przygoda3, B. Ramstein14,
A. Reshetin10, M. Roy-Stephan14, A. Rustamov4, A. Sadovsky10, B. Sailer12, P. Salabura3, A. Schmah4,F,∗,
E. Schwab4, J. Siebenson11, Yu.G. Sobolev15, S. Spataro8,D, B. Spruck8, H. Str¨ obele7, J. Stroth7,4, C. Sturm4,
A. Tarantola7, K. Teilab7, P. Tlusty15, M. Traxler4, R. Trebacz3, H. Tsertos13, V. Wagner15, M. Weber12,
C. Wendisch5, M. Wisniowski3, T. Wojcik3, J. W¨ ustenfeld5, S. Yurevich4, Y. Zanevsky6, P. Zhou5, P. Zumbruch4
(HADES collaboration)
1Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare - Laboratori Nazionali del Sud, 95125 Catania, Italy
2LIP-Laborat´ orio de Instrumenta¸ c˜ ao e F´ ısica Experimental de Part´ ıculas , 3004-516 Coimbra, Portugal
3Smoluchowski Institute of Physics, Jagiellonian University of Cracow, 30-059 Krak´ ow, Poland
4GSI Helmholtzzentrum f¨ ur Schwerionenforschung GmbH, 64291 Darmstadt, Germany
5Institut f¨ ur Strahlenphysik, Forschungszentrum Dresden-Rossendorf, 01314 Dresden, Germany
6Joint Institute of Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Russia
7Institut f¨ ur Kernphysik, Goethe-Universit¨ at, 60438 Frankfurt, Germany
8II.Physikalisches Institut, Justus Liebig Universit¨ at Giessen, 35392 Giessen, Germany
9Istituto Nazionale di Fisica Nucleare, Sezione di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy
10Institute for Nuclear Research, Russian Academy of Science, 117312 Moscow, Russia
11Excellence Cluster ’Origin and Structure of the Universe’ , 85478 Munich, Germany
12Physik Department E12, Technische Universit¨ at M¨ unchen, 85748 M¨ unchen, Germany
13Department of Physics, University of Cyprus, 1678 Nicosia, Cyprus
14Institut de Physique Nucl´ eaire (UMR 8608), CNRS/IN2P3 - Universit´ e Paris Sud, F-91406 Orsay Cedex, France
15Nuclear Physics Institute, Academy of Sciences of Czech Republic, 25068 Rez, Czech Republic
16Departamento de F´ ısica de Part´ ıculas, Univ. de Santiago de Compostela, 15706 Santiago de Compostela, Spain
17Instituto de F´ ısica Corpuscular, Universidad de Valencia-CSIC, 46971 Valencia, Spain
Aalso at ISEC Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
Balso at Technische Universit¨ at Dresden, 01062 Dresden, Germany
Calso at Dipartimento di Fisica, Universit` a di Milano, 20133 Milano, Italy
Dalso at Dipartimento di Fisica Generale, Universita’ di Torino, 10125 Torino, Italy
Ealso at Joint Institute of Nuclear Research, 141980 Dubna, Russia
Falso at Lawrence Berkeley National Lab, Berkeley California 94720, United States
∗corresponding author: Lorenz@Physik.uni-frankfurt.de, aschmah@lbl.gov
†deceased
Received: 24.12.2010 / Revised version: date
Abstract. We present transverse momentum spectra, rapidity distribution and multiplicity of Λ-hyperons
measured with the HADES spectrometer in the reaction Ar(1.76A GeV)+KCl. The yield of Ξ−is calculated
from our previously reported Ξ−/(Λ + Σ0) ratio and compared to other strange particle multiplicities.
Employing a strangeness balance equation the multiplicities of the yet unmeasured Σ±hyperons can be
estimated. Finally a statistical hadronization model is used to fit the yields of π−, K+, K0
Ξ−. The resulting chemical freeze-out temperature of T = (76 ± 2) MeV is compared to the measured
slope parameters obtained from fits to the transverse mass distributions of the different particles.
s, K−, φ, Λ and
PACS.
25.75.-q, 25.75.Dw

Page 2

2The HADES collaboration (G. Agakishiev et al.): Hyperon production in Ar+KCl collisions at 1.76A GeV
1 Introduction
Strange hadrons are particularly suitable probes of the
high density phase of nuclear matter produced in few GeV
heavy ion collisions. For instance, from systematic inves-
tigations of subthreshold K+production tight constraints
could be put on the nuclear equation of state at mat-
ter densities of 2-3 ρ0[1,2,3,4]. Furthermore, kaon phase
space distributions and flow patterns are considered to
be sensitive to the in-medium kaon potential [5,6,7]. On
the other hand, due to strangeness conservation in the
strong interaction, kaon production is intimately linked
to the concurrent production of hyperons. While strange
particle production is well understood in elementary NN
collisions, in heavy ion reactions multi-step processes in-
volving mesons or baryon resonances open up many ad-
ditional production channels, even below threshold. Thus,
strangeness-exchange channels like πΛ → NK−have been
proposed to explain the observed K−yields [8,9,10], just
as feeding through the φ → K+K−decay has been [11].
Various aspects of strangeness production at SIS (Schw-
erionen Synchrotronat GSI Darmstadt) energies have been
investigated by the FOPI and KaoS experiments (for re-
views see [12,13]). Evidently, any in-depth understanding
of strangenessproduction and propagation in heavy ion re-
actions requires information on all particles with open or
hidden strangeness. The HADES collaboration has done a
complete measurement in the system Ar+KCl at a bom-
barding energy of 1.76A GeV. Results on K0
have been published already in [14], on K+,K−and φ-
meson production in [11] and on the first observation at
such a low beam energy of the double-strange Ξ−hy-
peron in [15]. To complete the picture, hyperon produc-
tion remains to be addressed and this is the purpose of the
present paper. We report here on the results obtained with
the HADES detector on Λ production, from which, by ap-
plication of strangeness conservation, we could estimate
also the yield of the (not directly observed) Σ hyperons.
Furthermore, we compare our set of particle yields to the
result of a statistical hadronization model and discuss the
implications. Note that the FOPI collaboration performed
a similar analysis of strangeness production in the system
Ni+Ni at 1.93A GeV [16].
In Section 2 of this paper we give first a brief overview
of the HADES detector and relevant details of the Ar+KCl
data taking and then proceed to describe the employed
particle identification and Λ reconstruction procedures. In
section 3 we present spectra and production yields of the
Λ hyperons. In section 4 the Λ result is used to extract
the yield of the double-strange Ξ−from our previously
published Ξ−/Λ ratio [15]. With all experimental yields
established, strangeness balance is applied to estimate the
yield of the unobserved charged Σ hyperons. We compare
all yields obtained in Ar+KCl with respect to a statisti-
cal hadronization model and confront the fitted chemical
freeze-out temperature with the measured slope parame-
ters obtained from transverse mass distributions. Finally
we summarize our findings in section 5.
sproduction
Fig. 1. Impact parameter distributions of all and LVL1 se-
lected Ar+KCl reactions obtained from the UrQMD transport
code [18].
2 Experimental setup
HADES is a charged-particle detector consisting of a 6-
coil toroidal magnet centered on the beam axis and six
identical detection sections located between the coils and
covering polar angles between 18◦and 85◦. Each sector is
equipped with a Ring-Imaging Cherenkov (RICH) detec-
tor followed by Multi-wire Drift Chambers (MDCs), two
in front of and two behind the magnetic field, as well as a
scintillator hodoscope (TOF/TOFino). Lepton identifica-
tion is provided mostly by the RICH and supplemented at
low polar angles with Pre-SHOWER chambers, mounted
at the back of the apparatus. Hadron identification, how-
ever, is based on the time-of-flight and on the energy-loss
information from TOF/TOFino, as well as from the MDC
tracking chambers. A detailed description of HADES is
given in [17].
An argon beam of ∼ 106particles/s was incident with
a beam energy of 1.76A GeV on a four-fold segmented
KCl target with a total thickness corresponding to 3.3 %
interaction probability. A fast diamond start detector lo-
cated upstream of the target was intercepting the beam
and was used to determine the time-zero information. The
data readout was started by a first-level trigger (LVL1) re-
quiring a charged-particle multiplicity, MUL ≥ 16, in the
TOF/TOFino detectors. Based on a full GEANT simula-
tion of the detector response to Ar+KCl events generated
with the UrQMD transport model [18], we found that the
event ensemble selected by this (LVL1) trigger condition
has a mean number of participating nucleons (?Apart?)
equal to 38.5±3.9. Figure 1 illustrates the impact param-
eter distributions obtained from UrQMD calculations for
two event selections: all inelastic events and according to
the experimental LVL1 trigger condition.
The particle identification was done by a velocity vs.
momentum × polarity correlation, where the velocity was
determined by the time-of-flight measurement in the TOF
and TOFino scintillators with respect to the time-zero in-
formation and the tracked flight path. If needed, addi-
tional particle discrimination was gained from the energy-
loss (dE/dx) information in the MDC and scintillators.

Page 3

The HADES collaboration (G. Agakishiev et al.): Hyperon production in Ar+KCl collisions at 1.76A GeV3
3 Λ hyperon yield and spectra
3.1 Λ identification
The particle identification of kaons, φ, π−and Ξ−is de-
scribed in [11,15,14]. Here we add only those details spe-
cific to the reconstruction of Λ hyperons in their decay
channel Λ → p + π−(B.R. = 63.9%, cτ=7.89 cm [19]).
Note that at our beam energies the reconstructed Λ yield
contains also a contribution from decays of the slightly
heavier Σ0baryon into a Λ and a photon.
The decay products of the Λ hyperons have been iden-
tified using the MDC dE/dx and time-of-flight informa-
tion. The topology of the Λ decay into p-π−pairs has
been used to suppress the combinatorial background of
uncorrelated pairs. Cuts on the distance between the pri-
mary event vertex and the decay vertex (dV 0), on the dis-
tances between the proton (dp), respectively the π−(dπ−)
track and the primary vertex, on the distance of closest
approach between the two tracks (ddca) and on the dis-
tance of the reconstructed mother particle trajectory to
the primary vertex (dpπ−) were applied. Furthermore, a
minimum opening angle (αpπ−) was required to guaran-
tee a good decay vertex resolution. All selections used for
the analysis are listed in Table 1. For an estimation of the
systematic errors, the cut values have been varied within
reasonable limits. In total, 28 different cut combinations
were thus investigated, resulting in a total amount of re-
constructed Λ hyperons ranging from 36k to 191k. The
full reconstruction chain with all corresponding efficiency
corrections was applied for each of the cut variations. All
systematic errors are based on these cut variations and
represent the maximum/minimum deviation to the results
obtained with the chosen cut values in Table 1.
Figure 2 shows the invariant-massspectrum of all proton-
π−pairs which passed the cuts listed in Table 1. An event-
mixing technique has been used to model the combinato-
rial background of uncorrelated pairs. Displayed in Fig. 2
as a grey shaded histogram, the mixed event background
was normalized to the data on the left and right side of the
Λ peak. In total, for the optimal cut selection listed in Ta-
ble 1, about 100000 Λ hyperons were reconstructed, with a
mean signal-to-background ratio of 0.56. From a Gaussian
fit to the peak, the pole mass is determined to be 1114.3
MeV/c2, i.e. about 1.4 MeV/c2away from its listed value
[19]. We attribute this small difference to residual deficien-
cies of our track reconstruction and detector alignment.
3.2 Λ spectra
For further kinematical studies the Λ signal has been de-
termined in nine rapidity bins, ranging from −0.75 <
yc.m. < +0.15 in steps of 0.1, and up to ten transverse
mass bins in steps of 50 MeV/c2. The background sub-
tracted signal yields were corrected for acceptance and re-
construction efficiency using a full GEANT simulation of
the detector system described in [14] and a track-embedding
method. The geometrical acceptance, which also includes
the branching ratio of Λ → p + π−of 0.639, shows a
Fig. 2. Top: Invariant mass of all identified proton and π−
pairs after several cuts on the topology of the Λ decay kine-
matics were applied (see text for details). The grey shaded his-
togram shows the mixed-event combinatorial background, nor-
malized to the signal spectrum between 1080-1100 and 1130-
1150 MeV/c2. Bottom: Λ signal after background subtraction;
the solid red line shows a Gaussian fit to the signal.
smooth behaviour as a function of the transverse mass
and varies for most of the bins between 13% and 34%. It
is defined by the requirement that both daughter parti-
cles have hits in all MDC planes. The Λ reconstruction
efficiency is composed of the single track reconstruction
and particle identification efficiencies (≈80% per track)
and the cuts on the Λ-hyperon decay topology. The latter
one clearly dominates the reconstruction efficiency which
has values of 3% to 10%. The dominant topology cut is the
one applied on the distance between the primary vertex
and the Λ-decay vertex. It is in the order of the Λ-hyperon
mean decay length (see Table 1). Acceptance and recon-
struction efficiency are plotted for the mid-rapidity region
in Fig. 3.
The acceptance- and efficiency-corrected transverse-
mass spectra of Λ for the various rapidity bins are pre-
sented in Fig. 4. Shown is the number of counts per LVL1

Page 4

4 The HADES collaboration (G. Agakishiev et al.): Hyperon production in Ar+KCl collisions at 1.76A GeV
Table 1. Topological conditions values chosen for the Λ analysis (see text).
Cut
Value
dV 0
dp
dπ−
>dp
ddca
<10mm
dpπ−
<10mm
αpπ−
>14◦
>70mm>4.0mm
]
2
[MeV/c
Λ
-m
t
m
0200400
efficiency [%]
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
<0.05
c.m.
-0.05<y
acceptance
rec. efficiency
Fig. 3. (Color online) Acceptance and reconstruction efficiency
at mid-rapidity for Λ-hyperons as a function of the reduced
mass. The plotted acceptance (red open circles) includes al-
ready the branching ratio of 0.639 of Λ → p + π−. The recon-
struction efficiency (black filled circles) consists of the single
track reconstruction efficiencies of the daughter particles and
the efficiencies of the topological cuts applied to improve the
signal-to-background ratio (see text for details).
trigger, per transverse mass and per rapidity bin, divided
by m2
t. This representation is chosen in order to easily
apply Boltzmann fits to the resulting distributions, ac-
cording to
1
m2
t
d2M
dmtdyc.m.
= C(yc.m.) exp
?
−(mt− m0)c2
TB(yc.m.)
?
.(1)
The solid lines in Fig. 4 show the results of Boltz-
mann fits, where TB(yc.m.) represents the inverse slope
of each distribution. The resulting TB(yc.m.) values are
then plotted in Fig. 5 as a function of the center-of-mass
(cm) rapidity (yc.m. = y − y(cm), where y(cm) = 0.858
for symmetric collisions at 1.76A GeV). The full symbols
display the measured data, whereas the open ones are the
data reflected at c.m. rapidity. The error bars represent
the statistical errors. Assuming a thermal source, these
temperatures are expected to follow the relation
TB(yc.m.) =
Teff
cosh(yc.m.),(2)
yielding an effective temperature of Teff= (95.5 ±0.7(stat.)
+2.2(syst.)) MeV. Here the systematic error corresponds
to the variation of the cut values described above.
For each rapidity bin the transverse mass spectrum
was integrated in the following way: the yields in the cov-
ered bins were added and the fits were used to extrapolate
]
2
[MeV/c
Λ
-m
t
m
0200400
]
-3
)
2
)) [(MeV/c
c.m.
dy
M/(dm
2
) (d
2
(1/m
t
t
-15
10
-14
10
-13
10
-12
10
-11
10
-10
10
-9
10
-8
10
-7
10
-6
10
-5
10
-4
10
-3
10
-2
10
Λ
)
8
10
10
10
10
10
×
×
×
×
×
<+0.15 (
c.m.
<+0.05 (
c.m.
<-0.05 (
c.m.
<-0.15 (
c.m.
<-0.25 (
c.m.
+0.05<y
-0.05<y
-0.15<y
-0.25<y
-0.35<y
)
7
)
)
)
6
5
4
)
)
)
)
3
10
10
10
10
×
×
×
×
<-0.35 (
c.m.
<-0.45 (
c.m.
<-0.55 (
c.m.
<-0.65 (
c.m.
-0.45<y
-0.55<y
-0.65<y
-0.75<y
2
1
0
Fig. 4. Reduced (mt− mΛ) transverse mass spectra for dif-
ferent rapidity selections. For better legibility, the spectra are
scaled as indicated in the legend. The solid lines are fits with
Eq. 1 to the data.
into the unmeasured kinematic regions. The fits were in-
tegrated from 0 to the lower bin edge of the first measured
point and from the upper bin edge of the last measured
point to infinity. The fraction of the extrapolated yield in
the transverse mass spectra to the total yield is 36-43% for
the rapidity bins in the range −0.65 < yc.m.< 0.15, and
65% for the rapidity interval (−0.75 < yc.m. < −0.65).
The results are shown in Fig. 6, where the obtained ra-
pidity density distribution is displayed. The full trian-
gles show the values calculated by the integration of the
transverse mass spectra, while the open triangles repre-
sent points reflected with respect to the center-of-mass
rapidity.
For the determination of the total Λ multiplicity per
LVL1 event, the measured spectra were integrated. The
extrapolation into the unmeasured region was done by fit-
ting either a gaussian or a linear function to the first four
data points, as shown in Fig. 6. The mean value of these
two different extrapolations is used for the total yield.

Page 5

The HADES collaboration (G. Agakishiev et al.): Hyperon production in Ar+KCl collisions at 1.76A GeV5
c.m.
y
-101
[MeV]
B
T
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
Λ Λ
(measured)
(reflected)
Λ
Λ
0.7 MeV
±
= 95.5
eff
T
Fig. 5. Inverse-slope parameters from fits with Eq. (1) to the Λ
hyperon transverse mass spectra as a function of rapidity. The
solid line is a fit with Eq. (2) to the data points. The effective
temperature Teff is the function value at mid rapidity.
c.m.
y
-101
dM/dy
0
10
20
30
40
50
-3
10
×
Λ Λ
(measured)
(reflected)
Λ
Λ
Fig. 6. Rapidity distribution of Λ hyperons. The closed sym-
bols refer to measured data points calculated from the trans-
verse mass spectra, whereas the open symbols show the data
points reflected about center-of-mass rapidity. For the extrap-
olation to unmeasured rapidity values a linear and a Gaussian
function were fitted to the first four data points (see text).
The fraction of the Gaussian extrapolation to the total
yield is about 4.2%, whereas the fraction of the linear ex-
trapolation is negligible. The inclusive total Λ multiplic-
ity per LVL1 event was found to be (4.09 ± 0.1(stat.) ±
0.17(extr.)+0.17
to the extrapolation uncertainty in mtand the third one
to the systematic error obtained from the cut variations.
−0.37(syst.))×10−2, where the second errorrefers
A detailed description of the Λ analysis can be found in
[20].
4 Discussion
4.1 Particle yields
Knowing the yield of the Λ+Σ0hyperons and the Ξ−/(Λ+
Σ0) ratio yields the production rate of the Ξ−to (2.3 ±
0.9)×10−4, adding statistical and systematic errorsquadrat-
ically. Note that this value is of the same order of magni-
tude as the yield of the φ meson [11].
Table 2 summarizes all particle yields extrapolated to
full phase space as well as the corresponding inverse slope
parameters from fits to the particle mtspectra; results on
K+,K−,K0
s, and φ are taken from [11,14].
4.2 Strangeness balance
The strong interaction conserves strangeness, i.e. the num-
bers of s and s quarks produced in a heavy ion reaction
must be equal. As those quarks are ultimately bound in
hadrons the multiplicities of strange particles fulfill a bal-
ance equation which can be written at SIS energies as:
K++ K0= Σ0±+ Λ + K−+¯K0+ 2Ξ0,−
(3)
where, for simplicity, the symbols denoting the particles
stand for their respective yields at the time of production.
Note that this equation takes care of the strong decay of
heavier strange resonances via the counting of their de-
cay products, namely kaons and Λs. As mentioned ear-
lier, the Σ0can not be separated from the Λ, thus this
contribution is to be counted explicitly together with Λs.
Analogously, according to our analysis procedure, most
Ξ−,0decay products feed the Λ channel and are counted
as Λs, therefore the factor in Eq. (3) in front of the Ξ−,0
is two instead of four. (Note that anyhow the Ξ−,0contri-
butions are small.) In case of the neutral kaons, we mea-
sure in fact the yield of the K0
K0
K0)/2. Assuming isospin symmetry the yield
of the¯K0should be contributing here at the same order
as the K−yield. Eq. (3) can then be rewritten using the
measured yields. Hence the unobserved Σ±hyperon yield
can be estimated as:
s, which obeys the equality
s= (K0+¯
Σ++ Σ−= K++ 2K0
s− (Σ0+ Λ) − 2Ξ−− 3K−
(4)
Still heavier multi-strange particles, e.g. Ω hyperons, have
significantly higher production thresholds and should not
contribute sizeably at SIS energies. From Eq. (4) a total
multiplicity of charged Σ hyperons of (7.5±6.5)×10−3is
deduced when using the values of the multiplicities listed
in Table 2. The error is the quadratic sum of the statistical
and systematic error of the different yields. If one assumes
isospin symmetry for the Σ±,0yields one can subtract
the Σ0contribution from the Λ yield and finds the ratio
Σ±,0/Λ is 0.3 ± 0.26 although the difference in mass is
only 10%.

Page 6

6 The HADES collaboration (G. Agakishiev et al.): Hyperon production in Ar+KCl collisions at 1.76A GeV
Table 2. Multiplicities (i.e. yield/LVL1 event) and effective temperatures of particles produced in Ar+KCl reactions at 1.76A
GeV. The error on the Σ and Ξ−yield is the quadratically added statistical and systematic error.
Particle
π−
Λ + Σ0
K+
K0
K−
φ
Ξ−
Σ++ Σ−
Multiplicity
3.9 ± 0.1 ± 0.1
Teff [MeV]
82.4 ± 0.1+9.1
95.5 ± 0.7 + 2.2
89 ± 1 ± 2
92 ± 2
69 ± 2 ± 4
84 ± 8
-
-
Reference
[14]
this work
[11]
[14]
[11]
[11]
[15]
−4.6
(4.09 ± 0.1 ± 0.17+0.17
(2.8 ± 0.2 ± 0.1 ± 0.1) × 10−2
(1.15 ± 0.05 ± 0.09) × 10−2
(7.1 ± 1.5 ± 0.3 ± 0.1) × 10−4
(2.6 ± 0.7 ± 0.1 − 0.3) × 10−4
(2.3 ± 0.9) × 10−4
(0.75 ± 0.65) × 10−2
−0.37) × 10−2
S
estimated via strangeness balance
The only other published multiplicity of charged Σ hy-
perons in heavy ion collisions, based on a similar analysis
of strangeness yields measured with the FOPI detector at
GSI in Ni+Ni reactions at 1.93A GeV, is (7±8+32−17)×
10−3[16]. Differences with respect to our analysis are: (1)
a higher beam energy (1.93 vs. 1.76A GeV), (2) a larger
reaction system (58+58 vs. 40+37), and (3) a different
centrality selection (?Apart? = 71 vs. 38.5) resulting in a
higher Λ yield (0.137±0.005+0.007−0.008) and inverse
slope parameter (119±1+9−7). In view of the higher bom-
barding energy and larger system size, one would expect a
larger charged Σ contribution. The resulting Σ±,0/Λ ra-
tio is 0.08 ± 0.09 + 0.33 − 0.18. Unfortunately, the large
uncertainties prevent us to draw a firm conclusion on the
behavior of the respective cross sections with energy.
4.3 Comparison with statistical hadronization
Statistical hadronization models (SHM) have been suc-
cessful in fitting particle yields or yield ratios from rel-
ativistic and ultrarelativistic heavy ion collisions [21,22,
23,24]. With the help of SHM fits it has been possible
to reconstruct systematically the chemical freeze-out line
in the T – µb plane of the nuclear phase diagram with
µb being the baryochemical potential (see e.g. [24,26]).
However, while the various SHM approaches agree fairly
well at high bombarding energies, discrepancies appear
in the low-energy regime. Indeed, at the lower energies
it is not even clear, whether chemical equilibrium can be
reached [27] and therefore the question arises whether a
statistical treatment of particle production is meaning-
ful. The situation is further complicated by the need for
strangeness suppression, which is handled differently in
the various SHM implementations. Furthermore, at SIS
energies, only pions are produced abundantly. Heavier and
especially strange particles are rare, and their yields were
mostly poorly known. Hence in the past only few particle
yields with small statistical errors were available as input
to the fit procedure. In the following we fit eight particle
yields obtained from our Ar+KCl run with a statistical
hadronization model.
We choose the freely available THERMUS code [28],
using the mixed canonical ensemble where strangeness is
exactly conserved while all other quantum numbers are
calculated grand canonically. We handle the strangeness
suppression by introducing a strangeness correlation ra-
dius Rcwithin which strangeness has to be exactly con-
served; this is discussed in [29]. We fit simultaneously all
particle yields listed in Table 2 except for the Σ±, as
well as the mean number of participants ?Apart? and con-
strain the charge chemical potential µQ using the ratio
of the baryon and charge numbers of the collision sys-
tem. We find the chemical freeze-out at a temperature of
Tchem = (76 ± 2) MeV and at a baryochemical poten-
tial of µb= (799 ± 22) MeV. The strangeness correlation
radius comes out as Rc = (2.2 ± 0.2) fm, which corre-
sponds to about half the fitted radius R = (4.1 ± 0.5)
fm of the whole fireball. The exclusion of the Ξ−from
the fit changes the parameters only on the percent level,
but the χ2/d.o.f. value of the fit improves from 13.9/4 to
7.8/3. Fig. 7 shows the resulting freeze-out point together
with a compilation of similar points [30,24,31] in the T –
µbplane. Our result, as well as the FOPI result from the
collision system Al+Al at 1.9A GeV, differ from the reg-
ularity of freeze-out points following the fixed energy per
particle condition ?E?/?N? ≈ 1 GeV, which is one of the
commonly proposed freeze-out criteria [24]. This might be
due to the light collision systems, since small systems have
the tendency to show higher freeze-out temperatures [25].
A detailed comparison of the data with the statistical
model fit is shown in the upper part of Fig. 8, while the
lower part of this figure depicts the ratio of data and fit.
All particles except for the Ξ−are well described.
A particularly interesting case is the φ meson. The φ
is treated as a strangeness neutral object in the Rc for-
malism and is therefore not suppressed at all. Its yield is
well described by the SHM. This means that the φ yield is
compatible with the assumption that it takes part in the
equilibration of the hadrons. This is quite different from
the situation at higher bombarding energies, where the φ
requires indeed an effective strangeness between 1 and 2
to have the appropriate suppression in the SHM and to
reproduce the data [29]. For an understanding of φ pro-
duction, one may have a look at the φ/K−ratio which,
according to the SHM with Rc, should rise at low beam
energy. Such a behavior is indeed supported by our data,

Page 7

The HADES collaboration (G. Agakishiev et al.): Hyperon production in Ar+KCl collisions at 1.76A GeV7
[MeV]
b
µ
02004006008001000 1200
T [MeV]
0
50
100
150
200
RHIC/SPS/AGS (a)
RHIC/SPS/AGS/SIS (b)
HADES (Ar+KCl)
FOPI (Al+Al)
Fig. 7. (Color online) Chemical freeze-out points in the T –
µb plane. The filled black circles (a) are taken from [30], the
black open triangles (b) are from [24]. The red circle is taken
from [31]. The THERMUS fit to our Ar+KCl data is shown
as blue triangle. The dashed line correponds to a fixed energy
per nucleon of 1 GeV, calculated according to [24].
yield
-5
10
-3
10
-1
10
10
2
10
=2.61 GeV
NN
s
√
Data,
2.1MeV,
±
T=75.8
0.2fm, R
±
=2.2
C
R
21.6MeV,
0.5fm
±
=799.4
±
=4.1
b
µ
V
Exp/THERMUS
0
0.5
1
1.5
part
A
-πΛ
+
K
s
0
K
-
K φ
-
Ξ
+-
Σ
9
±
24
Fig. 8. (Color online) The upper plot shows the yields of sec-
ondary hadrons in Ar+KCl reactions (filled red circles) and
the corresponding THERMUS fit (blue bars). The lower plot
shows the ratio of the experimental value and the SHM value.
For the Ξ−the ratio number is quoted instead of a point.
as already discussed in [11], and the ratio seems to ap-
proach the value seen in elementary NN reactions [32].
According to the strangeness suppression mechanism
implemented in SHM, the double-strangeΞ−(S=2) should
be suppressed strongly with respect to the φ with its hid-
den strangeness (S=0). Nevertheless, our measured Ξ−
yield is of the same magnitude as the one of the φ, i.e. the
data show no indication for any strangeness suppression.
This is very surprising since the Ξ−yields observed above
threshold at RHIC [33], at SPS [34] and even at AGS [35]
are consistent with statistical model fits. In fact the same
secondary pion-hyperon process π + Y → φ + Y , which
was invoked by Kolomeitsev and Tomasik [36] to explain
the enhanced φ yield, can here be the origin of the high Ξ
production via the reaction π+Y → Ξ +K. To get a bet-
ter understanding, we may have to move away from the
SHM. One may calculate the probability for the produc-
tion of two ss pairs in one collision. Assuming that both
pairs are independently created, their production proba-
bility P2ss is given as the square of the single-pair pro-
duction probability Pss. Keeping associated production
in mind, Pss can be estimated as the combined multi-
plicity of all particles that carry a strange quark, respec-
tively the combined multiplicity of all anti-strange par-
ticles, i.e. K++ K0+ φ, yielding Pss≃ 0.05 and hence
P2ss ≃ 0.0025. Considering that the observed Ξ−yield
is in fact an order of magnitude smaller, we conclude
that in 10% of these events both s quarks end up to-
gether in a Ξ−, whereas from strangeness suppression in
the SHM one obtains less than 1%. A different realiza-
tion of the SHM using the strangeness canonical ensem-
ble and γsfor additional strangeness suppression delivers
comparable freeze-out parameters, with Tchem= (76 ± 5)
MeV, µb = (791 ± 33) MeV, R = (4.1 ± 0.9) fm and
γs= 0.37 ± 0.04 but fails to reproduce the φ multiplicity
by an order of magnitude due to its suppression with γ2
s.
4.4 Chemical vs. kinetic freeze-out
The temperature Tchemobtained for the chemical freeze-
out can be compared with the inverse-slope parameter
Teffobtained from Boltzmann fits to the mtspectra of the
different particle species. Apparently most of the inverse-
slope parameters are higher than the chemical freeze-out
temperature of the system. A pure Boltzmann shape can
be distorted by various effects, like collective motion or
early vs. late particle decays. One example is apparent in
the difference between the K+/K0
Fig. 9). The much lower value of Teffof the K−has often
been interpreted as due to its much later freeze-out time
[12] neglecting the admixture of soft K−stemming from
φ decays. In [37] however it was shown that these soft K−
indeed affect the shape of the spectra.
Effects of collective flow, on the other hand, should
influence the transverse mass slope more, the higher the
particle mass. From Fig. 9, where the fitted temperatures
are ordered by increasing particle mass, this seems not to
be a strong effect as expected for a small collision system
sand K−slopes (see

Page 8

8The HADES collaboration (G. Agakishiev et al.): Hyperon production in Ar+KCl collisions at 1.76A GeV
]
2
Particle Mass [MeV/c
05001000
[MeV]
eff
T
60
80
100
-π
0
s
/K
-
K
+
K
φ Λ
Fig. 9. (Color online) Effective temperature Teff of all mea-
sured particle species as a function of their mass. The horizon-
tal line and error band show the chemical freeze-out tempera-
ture Tchemfrom the THERMUS fit, whereas the dashed-dotted
line and the red error band show a linear fit to the data points
(K−are excluded, see text for details).
like Ar+KCl. However the inverse-slope parameter seems
to be slightly decreasing with decreasing mass.
To take this effect into account a linear fit to the data
points was applied (dashed-dotted line and red error band
in Fig. 9). The K−were excluded from the fit for the rea-
sons discussed above. The fit is clearly dominated by the
Λ and K+/K0
sdata points with small relative errors com-
pared to the φ and π−data points. Within errors, the
extrapolated fit value at mass 0 is still above the chemical
freeze-out temperature. Hence the presented data implies
an inversion of the kinetic- and chemical freeze-out sce-
nario, which cannot be the case for obvious reasons. This
means either the statistical model approach for small reac-
tion systems and small energies is not applicable, and/or
the unique kinetic freeze-out for all particles with one ra-
dial flow velocity is a too naive assumption for this system.
Future measurements of HADES in the reaction systems
Au+Au and Ag+Ag will give more insight into the com-
plex dynamics at low energies.
5 Summary and conclusions
We have presented phase space distributions of Λ hyper-
ons in Ar+KCl at 1.76A GeV measured with the HADES
spectrometer at GSI. Combining the measured Λ + Σ0
yield with our former data on strangeness production in
this system we have estimated the yield of the double-
strange Ξ−hyperon. We find that it is of the same order of
magnitude as the one of the φ meson. The fraction of the
unobserved charged Σ±hyperons could be constructed
using strangeness conservation.
Applying a statistical model fit to these hadron yields,
a fair agreement, except for the Ξ−, in a strangeness-
canonical approach is achieved. The φ, however, is well
reproduced without any suppression, in sharp contrast to
the situation at higher energies, where a suppression is
observed.
The HADES collaboration gratefully acknowledges the
support by BMBF grant 06MT9156, 06GI146I,06FY171
and 06DR9059D (Germany), by GSI (TMKrue 1012, GI
/ME3, OF/STR), by Excellence Cluster Universe (Ger-
many), by grants GA AS CR IAA100480803 and MSMT
LC 07050 MSMT (Czech Republic), by grant KBN5P03B
140 20 (Poland), by INFN (Italy), by CNRS/IN2P3 (France),
by grantsMCYT FPA2000-2041-C02-02and XUGA PGID
FPA2009-12931T02PXIC20605PN(Spain), by grant UCY-
10.3.11.12(Cyprus), by INTAS grant 06-1000012-8861and
EU contract RII3-CT-506078.
References
1. C. Sturm et al. (KaoS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 86,
39 (2001).
2. C. Fuchs, A. Faessler, E. Zabrodin, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86,
1974 (2001).
3. C. Hartnack, J. Aichelin, J. Phys. G 28, 1649 (2002).
4. C. Hartnack, H. Oeschler and J. Aichelin, Phys. Rev. Lett.
96, 012302 (2006).
5. J. Schaffner-Bielich, J. Bondorf, A. Mishustin, Nucl. Phys.
A 625, 325 (1997).
6. W. Cassing, E.L. Bratkovskaya, U. Mosel, S. Teis, A. Sibirt-
sev, Nucl . Phys. A 614 415 (1997).
7. F. Uhlig et al. (KaoS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 95,
12301 (2005).
8. C. Hartnack, H. Oeschler and J. Aichelin, Phys. Rev. Lett.
90, 102302 (2003).
9. A. F¨ orster et al. (KaoS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 91,
152301 (2003).
10. H. Schade, Gy. Wolf and B. K¨ ampfer, Phys. Rev. C 81,
034902 (2010).
11. G. Agakishiev et al. (HADES Collaboration), Phys. Rev.
C 80, 025209 (2009).
12. A. F¨ orster et al. (KaoS Collaboration), Phys. Rev. C 75,
024906 (2007).
13. C. Fuchs, Progr. Part. Nucl. Phys. 56, 1 (2006).
14. G. Agakishiev et al. (HADES Collaboration), Phys. Rev.
C 82, 044907 (2010).
15. G. Agakishiev et al. (HADES Collaboration), Phys. Rev.
Lett. 103, 132301 (2009).
16. M. Merschmeyer et al. (FOPI Collaboration), Phys. Rev.
C 76, 024906 (2007).
17. G. Agakishiev et al. (HADES Collaboration), Eur. Phys.
J. A 41, 243 (2009).
18. S.A. Bass et al., Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. 41 225 (1998).
19. C. Amsler et al. (Particle Data Group), Phys. Lett. B 667,
1 (2008).
20. A. Schmah, PhD thesis, Technical University Darmstadt,
Darmstadt (2008).
21. R. Averbeck, R. Holzmann, V. Metag and R. S. Simon,
Phys. Rev. C 67, 024903 (2003).
22. F. Becattini, M. Gazdzicki, A. Keranen, J. Manninen and
R. Stock, Phys. Rev. C 69, 024905 (2004).
23. P.Braun-Munzinger, K.
arXiv:nucl-th/0304013 (2003).
24. J. Cleymans, H. Oeschler, K. Redlich and S. Wheaton,
Phys. Rev. C 73, 034905 (2006).
Redlich andJ. Stachel,

Page 9

The HADES collaboration (G. Agakishiev et al.): Hyperon production in Ar+KCl collisions at 1.76A GeV9
25. J. Cleymans et al., Phys. Rev. C 59, 1663 (1999).
26. A. Andronic et al., Nucl. Phys. A 837 65 (2010).
27. V. Koch, J. Phys. G 30, S41 (2004).
28. S. Wheaton and J. Cleymans, Comput. Phys. Commun.
180, 84 (2009).
29. I. Kraus, J. Cleymans, H. Oeschler, K. Redlich and
S. Wheaton, Phys. Rev. C 76, 064903 (2007).
30. A. Andronic, P. Braun-Munzinger and J. Stachel, Nucl.
Phys. A 772, 167 (2006).
31. X. Lopez et al. (FOPI Collaboration), Phys. Rev. C 76,
052203 (2007).
32. Y. Maeda et al. (ANKE Collaboration), Phys. Rev. C 77,
015204 (2008).
33. J. Adams et al. (STAR Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett.
98, 062301 (2007).
34. F. Antinori et al. (NA57 Collaboration), Phys. Lett. B
595, 68 (2004).
35. P. Chung et al. (E895 Collaboration), Phys. Rev. Lett. 91,
202301 (2003).
36. E. E. Kolomeitsev and B. Tomasik, J. Phys. G 36, 095104
(2009).
37. M.Lorenz
et al.
(HADES
BORMIO2010 (2010) 038.
Collaboration), PoS